Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    42

    vps.net the best or the worst idea?

    Hi guys im thinking of moving all my sites to the cloud and vps.net is on our list, however upon some google searching
    "vps.net sucks" query /it seems like alot of people were unhappy with their service however that was 2011-2012 I dont know about 2013. So i would like everyones opinion on this. Is it okay in 2013? Have they improved? It says self healing and leads to 100% uptime because of fail overs or is that a gimmick?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    India
    Posts
    748
    We have had some good experience with vps.net ( with their OnApp cloud ) back in 2012. They are a very big provider and it is quite common to get mixed reviews about big providers ( some exceptional cases are there, I agree ). Anyway someone here may come up with their "bad experience" here as well if any such personal is here. Please wait for more reviews!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    188
    I guess it depends which location you need (like didn't they have an outage on their London DC recently?)

    I'm on their San Jose node and it works like a charm for me.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Dub,Lon,Dal,Chi,NY,LA
    Posts
    1,838
    One thing to bear in mind is that self-healing never means 100% uptime. It only means you can recover from hardware failures in an automated way. You will still have an outage of at the very least a few minutes while recovery happens. Also bear in mind that 99.9% of the issues you are likely to hit wont' be hardware related.

    If you -need- 100% uptime, you will need to design an architecture of at least two servers and plan for it.
    dediserve www.dediserve.com
    Leading provider of enterprise SSD cloud platforms with 15 clouds in 3 regions
    Dublin, London, Amsterdam, Vienna, Frankfurt, New York, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Toronto, Singapore, Jakarta, Hong Kong, Sydney

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    42
    I understand self healing is not 100% what about fail over? I know i dont see 100% uptime on their website but base on the reports and complaints i found on the web they have alot of problems with their SAN? So this doesnt refer to the physical server or the network but refers to their storage infra .

    Then again im actually wondering if they even do have this solutions eg self healing or is it just there as a gimmick to mis lead customers. Also it seems they dont publish problems publicly eg down time or server maintenance dates... So its abit sketchy imo. I rather go with a host that is transparent for the important parts and is reputable. Don't get me wrong vps.net is a huge company and their price is not cheap by any imagination lol.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Dub,Lon,Dal,Chi,NY,LA
    Posts
    1,838
    Self healing / failover is pretty much the same thing.

    If a hypervisor dies, the machines that were running on it spread out to other hypervisors and boot up again. There is a small risk of file system damage depending on how the hypervisor failed, and allow between 3-15 minutes (all things being equal) for the boot up to occur from the failure.

    Not so much a gimmick, in that it does work, but most people don't realise it's a recovery, rather than a magic tool for 100% uptime. There is no substitute for building for 100% in your own architecture, rather than relying on a cloud to deliver it.

    Cloud is great for rapid deployment, flexibility, scalability, elasticity, etc. But don't assume it will improve your uptime out of the box.
    dediserve www.dediserve.com
    Leading provider of enterprise SSD cloud platforms with 15 clouds in 3 regions
    Dublin, London, Amsterdam, Vienna, Frankfurt, New York, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Toronto, Singapore, Jakarta, Hong Kong, Sydney

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    42
    Would like to hear more opinions on current/previous customers of vps.net recently visited their facebook page and reading the comments proved not to be pretty :\

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    LocalHost
    Posts
    1,303
    I was having a VPS at vps.net few months before.
    They are good with semi-managed service. However, I think they are little costly, no free backup. Once you are on vps.net you and you face any problem, you will get answer to upgrade your node (+ $20/ month).
    YagHost - Pure SSD Hosting | Since 2007 | Average Response Time: 15 min
    Web Hosting | Reseller Hosting | Managed VPS Hosting
    99.9% Server Uptime Guarantee | 24/7 Rapid Response Tech Support | 30 Day Money Back Guarantee
    LopHost.com - Web Hosting Tutorials

  9. #9
    Back in 2011, we used VPS.NET. At that time, yes it was very stable - we used many nodes. But due to the cost, we switched to dedicated server rather than sticking with VPS.NET, we only had 1 vps problem (that was because an upgrade is needed since resource usage went high) which caused downtimes and 1 network outage.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-23-2012, 07:44 AM
  2. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-04-2011, 10:12 AM
  3. Worst Service Ever from B-ONE.NET
    By filer in forum Web Hosting Lounge
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-28-2005, 04:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •