I have an opportunity to migrate from hosting a few dozen data-base driven sites on several different VPS's to one dedicated server. This is a comparison not only between VPS and dedicated but between two hosting companies so some of the differences I list here are policy differences and not just inherent limitations of VPS or dedicated platforms in general.
Main differences/benefits between the VPS and dedicated server I am looking at are:
- I want to have everything in one location versus spread between several servers. Tired of managing several VPS's (and potentially more when additional clients come).
- Much better upgrade options provided by dedicated hosting company compared to using VPS company.
- Box that my VPS's are running on has two P4s, dedicated server has single Athlon 3000+ XP. Average number of other VPS's on same box is about 2 dozen.
- More disk space availible on dedicated server for less
- Better support with dedicated hosting company
- Running RedHat Enterprise on dedicated server, FreeBSD on VPS.
- Apache 2.0 on dedicated server (1.3 on VPS).
I feel the pros to moving to a dedicated box outweight the cons. I just want to know what you all think about making a move from VPS's to a dedicated server in this situation. What are your impressions/ideas?
I think going to the dedicated server level is a great idea if you wish to expand your site(s) or business. Not only are you saving money since VPS tend to cost more if you add up the space to match a dedicated server but you get to control more than usually on dedicated servers.
Do you think that moving from a dual P4 to a single Athlon 3000 XP is counterd by the fact that I will have full access to the Athlon chip versus whatever portion of the dual P4 chips I was allotted on the VPS?
Also, the package comes with a 120GB EIDE drive. Or, I have the option of getting a 72GB SCSI, for $40 more a month. Currently, my VPS's are using SCSI. The websites that we normally build are database driven. On average one page hit usually represents 2 or 3 database queries. Between all of the sites we host, we average about 215,000 pageviews a month and about 7,000 pageviews a day.
Do you think that the 120GB EIDE would scale to about 8 times the load we have now (along with the Athlon CPU mentioned above)? Or will the performance difference be noticeable enough to warrant going with SCSI in the first place?
Last edited by Temujin_12; 05-23-2005 at 07:23 PM.
Generally you get more bang for your buck with a Single CPU vs a Dual CPU system. Obviously Dual CPU's don't double your performance, it often only increases in low double digits and varies alot based on the tasks and OS/Application support.
You'd definately be better off going with a dedicated single CPU vs. a shared VPS with Dual's.
IDE is cheaper, and more space per dollar but generally slower and less reliable than SCSI.
SCSI will be more expensive but more reliable and outperforms IDE on IO per second.
It really depends on the usage you expect your sites to have on which drive may be necessary, or if you need a large amount of storage 120GB+ but are still on a budget - a large EIDE drive is likely your best choice. The amount of pageviews you're talking about can easily be handled by an IDE drive.
I just wanted to put some closure to this post by saying that we went ahead and migrated to the single dedicated server and it was a VERY good decision. It did take an entire month's worth of work to do it though since we had a few dozen sites to migrate (ranging in complexity from static to very-VERY complex).
The dedicated environment from Rackspace is much better for us than the multiple VPS environment we were in with Verio.
Just to balance what was said here, this post was not meant to diminish VPS technology in any way. As metioned before, it has its place. In fact, I am thinking of getting a VPS for personal use. However, if you find that you are 'duct-taping' VPS's together to suit your needs it is time to think about switching to a dedicated server.
Going from a vps to a dedicated solution is a great idea, but be smart.
The number 1 thing you should focus on, is your security.
When you use a VPS if someone drops a root kit to your system, you can deal with most of them intelligently because your kernal is protected and not at risk of being modified.
With dedicated solutions there is much more risk you take and you should step up all security measures. Expecially because of Mysql injection hacking, and php/asp upload script hacking, google hacking, and many other methods.
Brute force detector
root checker on cron job
auto backups on alternate hard drive
resetting ssh to alternate port
these are just a few of the things you will set up if your smart.
I am running about 30 web sites hosted on a VPS and shared hosting. I am thinking of getting another VPS. May I know how many daily visitors & page impression per day you received before you decided to move to a dedicated server, and also how many web site?
I need to know because I need to plan for the future. I am not sure whether it is wise for me to have 2 VPS at 2 different companies.
Here are some web stats from a single month reflecting the load we had amongst our different VPS servers:
Total Pageviews 252,736.00
Total Hits 1,131,300.00
Total Bytes Transferred 9.16 GB
Average Hits Per Day 37,710.00
Average Bytes Transferred Per Day 312.54 MB
For us, the major aspects that motivated us to mover were:
1- Poor customer service
2- Continually increasing difficulty managing a growing number of VPS
I can't say whether or not you should switch to a VPS. It is more of a personal (company) decision. We seemed to have crossed our threshold for how much time and energy we were willing to put into our server(s) to keep them running.
We have continued to grow from a few months ago and haven't had any load problems at all with our new server. Here's the same stats from before the switch but for last month:
Total Pageviews 339,742.00
Total Hits 1,139,755.00
Total Bytes Transferred 12.17 GB
Average Hits Per Day 37,991.83
Average Bytes Transferred Per Day 415.47 MB