Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    3,352

    Question Would you eventually move to dedicated server?

    is there really any saving going colo? i got two dedicated server, one at theplanet one at LT. both company give very good bw while i see colo provider like colo4dallas and corporatecolo only offer 100 and 500.

    the only advantage that i see is having your own machine with hardware that you don't have to pay for but $69 for 100gb? isn't that a little low?

    opps! my title is wrong. it should be "would you eventually move to colo?"

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    10,574
    If you have more than 10 servers it would be wise to co-locate. At your current size, it isn't really worth it. Remember that the hardware is yours therefore, if it fails you must goto the data center and replace it or perhaps, you can work out a deal with the data center to have them replace it for you and you pay for it. That depends on the data center, tho.

    Thanks,
    MediaLayer, LLC - www.medialayer.com Learn how we can make your website load faster, translating to better conversion rates for your business!
    The pioneers of optimized web hosting, featuring LiteSpeed Web Server & SSD Storage - Celebrating 10 Years in Business

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    986
    I think this totally depends on the deals you can find; really it could go either way. I think you could definately end up saving more in the long run with Colo with the right setup, but at the same time, you could potentially run into a whole lot of headaches with support. The question is really how deep are you willing to get your hands in this, related to what's necessary.
    Corey Northcutt | Northcutt
    Competitive inbound marketing with a hosting industry competency.
    Social | Content | Optimization | Outreach

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    986
    ^- what elix said
    Corey Northcutt | Northcutt
    Competitive inbound marketing with a hosting industry competency.
    Social | Content | Optimization | Outreach

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    WebHostingTalk
    Posts
    8,878
    Originally posted by elix
    If you have more than 10 servers it would be wise to co-locate. At your current size, it isn't really worth it. Remember that the hardware is yours therefore, if it fails you must goto the data center and replace it or perhaps, you can work out a deal with the data center to have them replace it for you and you pay for it. That depends on the data center, tho.

    Thanks,
    We colo quite a few servers in a private data center here in Tampa. There are pluses and minuses to both scenario's... I like having my own equipment which I can manage. I am not at the mercy of a datacenter tech nor their policies when something fails.

    The minus, I like it when someone else has to deal with the hardware problems.

    Sirius
    I support the Human Rights Campaign!
    Moving to the Tampa, Florida area? Check out life in the suburbs in Trinity, Florida.

  6. #6
    You would most definitely need a pool of servers to make it worthwhile to go Colo. One advantage of Colo is that the bandwidth provided can be shared with all your servers so there is no real wastage.

    Personally I wouldn't consider Colo as I am not near any datacenter, do not have the time to go fix hardware issues and my needs are too small to consider it. I do not quite need any special hardware and would like the ability to move on to a new configuration as and when necessary without worrying about ailing hardware.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    4,612
    Co-lo usually pays off if you either have a lot of server (5-10), or if you have high-end servers.

    For high-end servers (dual Opterons, lots of RAM, etc), you'll usually pay quite a premium through the dedicated server companies, and so co-location gives you a lot more flexibility.
    Scott Burns, President
    BQ Internet Corporation
    Remote Rsync and FTP backup solutions
    *** http://www.bqbackup.com/ ***

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    523
    I have to disagree currently I am co-locating a server with Custom.net. I am getting a shared 1mbps connection for $39.99 a month. My server is a Dell PowerEdge with a P4 2.5ghz 1gig of ram , two 160gig ATA 133 Maxtor hard drives running Raid 1 and a 250gig back up drive. I never go over 1mbps so co-locating is perfect for me.

    Dell servers are rock solid and very stable, the server has been problem free ever sense the day I bought it. And that was almost 2 years ago. If you buy good equipment then you shouldn't have a problem.

    The server has paid for its self two times over. If rented a server with the same stats it would be over $150 a month. Sure I have less bandwidth but I can add another shared 1mbps for $29.99 per month. And if I really needed some bandwidth I could move the server to Burst.net and get 2,000gigs of transfer for $109 per month.

    If I wanted to swap out the two 160gig hard drives with two 250gig hard drives and add another 1gig of ram all I would have to do is drive to the data center. Having my own server gives me total control. I wouldn't trade that for anything.

    P.S. incase your wondering about Custom.net's shared 1mbps connection. I will do my best to explain. They put so many server's on a connection and share the connection between the servers. I am not sure of the ratio, but I do know my server screams. Its on a 100mbps port and I can download a test file at 768kb. That's the max speed of my cable modem. My average ping is 40ms. And their service is out of this world. Last week I had a failed kernel install, it was 3am on a Sunday. I called Custom.net because I couldn't get the server to boot from the remote reboot port. Less than 30 minutes latter the server was back online and they hooked up the KVM over IP for free. I couldn't ask for better service. (Note: I didn't check the server for 30 minutes it may have been up sooner.)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    3,352
    Originally posted by Soulwatcher1974
    I have to disagree currently I am co-locating a server with Custom.net. I am getting a shared 1mbps connection for $39.99 a month. My server is a Dell PowerEdge with a P4 2.5ghz 1gig of ram , two 160gig ATA 133 Maxtor hard drives running Raid 1 and a 250gig back up drive. I never go over 1mbps so co-locating is perfect for me.

    Dell servers are rock solid and very stable, the server has been problem free ever sense the day I bought it. And that was almost 2 years ago. If you buy good equipment then you shouldn't have a problem.

    The server has paid for its self two times over. If rented a server with the same stats it would be over $150 a month. Sure I have less bandwidth but I can add another shared 1mbps for $29.99 per month. And if I really needed some bandwidth I could move the server to Burst.net and get 2,000gigs of transfer for $109 per month.

    If I wanted to swap out the two 160gig hard drives with two 250gig hard drives and add another 1gig of ram all I would have to do is drive to the data center. Having my own server gives me total control. I wouldn't trade that for anything.

    P.S. incase your wondering about Custom.net's shared 1mbps connection. I will do my best to explain. They put so many server's on a connection and share the connection between the servers. I am not sure of the ratio, but I do know my server screams. Its on a 100mbps port and I can download a test file at 768kb. That's the max speed of my cable modem. My average ping is 40ms. And their service is out of this world. Last week I had a failed kernel install, it was 3am on a Sunday. I called Custom.net because I couldn't get the server to boot from the remote reboot port. Less than 30 minutes latter the server was back online and they hooked up the KVM over IP for free. I couldn't ask for better service. (Note: I didn't check the server for 30 minutes it may have been up sooner.)
    it seem like colo work better for server with better hardware and close to your house.

    that's the advanatage that i see in colo, you get to use what you want to use (hardware) you're not stuck with what dedicated server providers can offer.

    so...the total BW that you get is 330gb? if i'm not mistaking it from their webiste about share connection.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    2,179
    No the advantage of colo has already been outlined

    1) Pool bandwidth commit so no waste
    2) Ability to choose from a wider range of providers and create your own mix

    it really depends on what kind of bandwidth you need and how mission critical your application is
    ServGrid - www.servgrid.com - Affordable and Reliable SSD Cloud Solutions
    Premium 10G Network, 2(N+1) Powerplant and SSD Performance
    Web, Reseller, KVM VPS, Storage and Private Cloud Hosting
    Click here to see our SSD Benchmarks!

Posting Permissions

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