Results 151 to 171 of 171
-
07-07-2012, 12:14 AM #151Disabled
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Global
- Posts
- 1,642
I think there's a server option for everyone, and that both rental and colo (or even RTO/LTO for an in-between) can have their own benefits dependant on the needs of the buyer.
Personally though I've moved away from colocation, as I wouldn't like to bring any of the stress of colo into any of my companies. Yes, dedicated providers can have problems too, we all can, but the difference is who is responsible for getting things back on track when they go wrong.
When there's a hardware issue, it needs to be fixed fast, whether HA or not time is money for most infrastructures. If you live right next to the datacenter or have someone available 24x7 then colo can work. However my situation is that we're based in the UK and although we have servers located here, we need to give equal priority to our global network.
If, for example part of our US network went down in a colo environment, it'd be completely down to on-site staff to work with us, which of course means cost which on a wide scale adds up very quickly, combining on-site staff hours and hardware replacement.
My personal rule for colocation is, simply don't colo if you can't get to the datacenter in < 30 minutes or so, day or night, unless of course you have a good deal on remote hands.
Financially, you also need to justify long-term whether the investment of colocation is worth it, because it certainly isn't a cheaper option even if it seems so.
Unless you can get great rates on used EOL hardware, or have an option to migrate old hardware to a lower budget service, then when the EOL comes you may end up with some considerably out of date components, worth maybe 20% of what you paid.Last edited by iexo; 07-07-2012 at 12:20 AM.
-
07-07-2012, 12:07 PM #152Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- Singapore
- Posts
- 1,234
redundant controller iscsi san example: netapp fas2240
http://www.netapp.com/us/products/st...stems/fas2200/
this netapp san storage will have 2 controller, each controller with 2 x 1Gbps ISCSI port, redundant power supply.
2 server have their own local harddisk for operating system, but data volume is mounted via network on the iscsi san storage via iscsi protocol
Install linux heartbeat in both server to monitor heartbeat and services eg. mysql database, Server 1(Active), Server 2(Standby), if server 1 die, Server 2 will takeover the ip address of server 1 and also take over mount point of the data volume. Zero downtime for the mysql database in this setup.
Server 1 iscsi connect to SAN Storage controller 1 port 1
Server 1 iscsi connect to SAN Storage controller 2 port 1
Server 2 iscsi connect to SAN Storage controller 1 port 2
Server 2 iscsi connect to SAN Storage controller 2 port 2
Getting a bit lengthy here, but hope this information helps, a lot more for you to read and understand, try this http://www.scribd.com/doc/36105045/S...-Kvm-on-NetappAlan Woo, alan [@] ne.com.sg
= NewMedia Express Pte Ltd (AS38001)
= IP Transit, Colocation & Dedicated Servers in Singapore | Hong Kong | Tokyo | Seoul | Jakarta |
= Singapore Speedtest speedtest.sg
-
07-07-2012, 12:08 PM #153Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- Singapore
- Posts
- 1,234
Alan Woo, alan [@] ne.com.sg
= NewMedia Express Pte Ltd (AS38001)
= IP Transit, Colocation & Dedicated Servers in Singapore | Hong Kong | Tokyo | Seoul | Jakarta |
= Singapore Speedtest speedtest.sg
-
07-11-2012, 07:07 AM #154Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,976
Superb Houston/Los Angeles Colocation: LAYERHOST.COM https://www.layerhost.com/colocation
*not affiliated, just recommendation*
-
07-13-2012, 06:30 AM #155Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,976
I am about to finalize my decision.
I have decided to get 3 servers...2 web servers and 1 storage server.
The 2 web servers will be mirrored and then share the 1 storage server.
Based on my finding i don't think i need virtualization, since i do not intend to use multiple operating systems. I plan to use CentOS and that is it, with DirectAdmin control panel to administer the servers.
So i believe i will be using Pacemaker with Heartbeat. I will be testing things very soon to get used to this setup before proceeding to colocating. I know the moment i start colocation, there will be no looking back at all. So just getting ready for this lifetime journey!Superb Houston/Los Angeles Colocation: LAYERHOST.COM https://www.layerhost.com/colocation
*not affiliated, just recommendation*
-
07-13-2012, 11:11 AM #156Eternal Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 10,710
Are you sure you want to set things up this way? The storage server is going to be a SPOF anyway, and access to the storage will be much slower than just using local disks, especially if you're just going to connect over a gigabit link and nothing else.
Also even if virtualization is not a requirement to make things happen, I think you'll find it makes a lot of things easier.
-
07-13-2012, 11:33 AM #157Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,976
Superb Houston/Los Angeles Colocation: LAYERHOST.COM https://www.layerhost.com/colocation
*not affiliated, just recommendation*
-
07-13-2012, 11:41 AM #158Newbie
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 16
-
07-13-2012, 12:21 PM #159Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,976
Superb Houston/Los Angeles Colocation: LAYERHOST.COM https://www.layerhost.com/colocation
*not affiliated, just recommendation*
-
07-13-2012, 12:46 PM #160Eternal Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 10,710
Here's the problem with your idea.
You want to have two front-end servers and then one storage machine.
You think it's redundant, because if one front-end server fails, you have another. It's not really redundant, because if your storage machine fails, you are dead in the water.
In conclusion, your storage setup needs to be redundant too, and that's complex to do right.
Take a look at the problems lots of 'cloud' providers have with their SANs. Unless you invest decent money into this, it's really not recommended.
-
07-13-2012, 01:30 PM #161Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,976
Got you.
So i mean how will you advice i setup the servers so i can protect myself from hardware failure downtimes and the likes?
How else will i be able to mirror the database server in realtime?
Can 2 servers using Pacemaker+DRDB+Corosync help me? Doesn't using Openfiler require a shared remote storage?
Open to advice and helps.Last edited by nokia3310; 07-13-2012 at 01:34 PM.
Superb Houston/Los Angeles Colocation: LAYERHOST.COM https://www.layerhost.com/colocation
*not affiliated, just recommendation*
-
07-13-2012, 02:20 PM #162Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- Virginia
- Posts
- 1,314
-
07-13-2012, 07:16 PM #163Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- Pennsylvania
- Posts
- 778
Seconded. It's actually very simple to just buy a second server and replicate everything in real time via a local LAN. Heck, you could even get away with near-real-time on a shared hosting server, as long as you're honest with your customers. Anyone who has ever suffered through a totally dead server with no backups can tell you how great it would be to hear the words "...but we were able to restore a backup from 12 hours ago!".
The world would be a better place if people drank better coffee.
-
07-13-2012, 07:40 PM #164Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Posts
- 4,533
-
07-13-2012, 08:31 PM #165Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- Michigan, USA
- Posts
- 529
I took the colo plunge and it was the best decision I have ever made. Buying my server and adding another 4GB of ram cost me around $700 and my colo costs $50 a month for 100mbps port and 2tb of bandwidth.
If I run the server for 3 years and amusing nothing breaks down the server is only going to cost me $69.45 a month. Show me where I can rent a 2.9GHZ dual core with 8GB of ram and a 1tb hard drive for $69.45 a month.
GregThe Mc Nation: Your Complete Minecraft Resource Guide!
Now Featuring Xenforo 2!
-
07-13-2012, 08:50 PM #166Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Posts
- 4,533
datashack.net
Quad core/ 8GB of memory and a 1TB hard drive for $69 a month. 45 cents less a month and includes free parts replacement. 10tb of bandwidth too.
Wholesaleinternet will also get close to that.
If less space is fine, reliablesite could do the same with a small SSD drive.
If you don't mind dual core atoms, I could mention 3-4 more hosts.
No need to worry about hardware failure for any of these providers. They all pay for the replacements.
Oh yeah and if you don't mind a setup fee, hetzner Intel® Core™ i7-2600 Quadcore
incl. Hyper-Threading Technology
RAM
16 GB DDR3 RAM
Hard disks
2 x 3 TB SATA 6 Gb/s HDD
7200 rpm (Software-RAID 1)
NIC
1 Gbit OnBoard
connected at 100 Mbit
Backup Space
100 GB
Traffic
Unlimited*
Smaller setup fee vs the 700 you paid.
Last edited by techjr; 07-13-2012 at 08:58 PM.
-
07-13-2012, 10:47 PM #167Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- Michigan, USA
- Posts
- 529
The Mc Nation: Your Complete Minecraft Resource Guide!
Now Featuring Xenforo 2!
-
07-14-2012, 05:35 AM #168Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,976
Superb Houston/Los Angeles Colocation: LAYERHOST.COM https://www.layerhost.com/colocation
*not affiliated, just recommendation*
-
07-14-2012, 10:05 AM #169Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- New York City
- Posts
- 5,169
Not everyone is in need of collocation or needs to have their site solo on a server. Collocation overall is a great thing it saves you tons of money and helps you run your business in better ways.
-
07-14-2012, 01:02 PM #170Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Dallas/FortWorth TX
- Posts
- 1,703
From what I have seen in the hosting industry. It takes huge commitment to do this business and a lot of providers small or medium do not want to commit or stay invested for the long. So the only way out without any liability if use a dedi and not colocation. No doubt we have seen lots of providers come and go over the years.
<<< Please see Forum Guidelines for signature setup. >>>
-
07-14-2012, 01:19 PM #171Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,976
Superb Houston/Los Angeles Colocation: LAYERHOST.COM https://www.layerhost.com/colocation
*not affiliated, just recommendation*
Similar Threads
-
[UK] Fancy some colocation that ISN'T in BlueSquare? Colo a server for £25.00 /month
By ValueVPS-Dave in forum Colo Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 01-06-2010, 05:02 AM -
[UK] Fancy some colocation that ISN'T in BlueSquare? Colo a server for £25.00 /month
By ValueVPS-Dave in forum Colo Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 12-22-2009, 08:42 AM -
[UK] Fancy some colocation that ISN'T in BlueSquare? Colo a server for £25.00 /month
By ValueVPS-Dave in forum Colo Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 11-19-2009, 08:03 AM -
[UK] Fancy some colocation that ISN'T in BlueSquare? Colo a server for £25.00 /month
By ValueVPS-Dave in forum Colo Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 11-10-2009, 01:02 PM -
[UK] Fancy some colocation that ISN'T in BlueSquare? Colo a server for £25.00 /month
By ValueVPS-Dave in forum Colo Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 10-30-2009, 02:20 PM