Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Dedicated Server : Outgrown our Web Host, Need Advice ASAP!

[dman42]

Hi everyone,

I am not looking for a referral to a particular web host, just some advice on my options so that I can search for a web host on these forums afterward.

Some background:
We are currently with a small host that is overall pretty good, but there have been a number of issues over the past few years that have compounded and now we feel like they aren't able to provide the service we require.

We have 2 servers right now, a VDS for testing and a high-end dedicated for deployment. We have a very unique web hosting related product that we are launching (and advertising) on WebHostingTalk very soon, but would like to move these servers to a more reliable web host first. The product is a Software as a Service (SaaS) so the hosting we have is extremely important.

My questions are as follows:

1. If my primary concerns are speed, security and reliability, considering we need quite advanced servers, should I be looking for another dedicated (with the possibility of load-balancing) or should I look at a cloud solution?

2. In your opinion, what is the best, i.e. fastest data center that serves the West Coast of North America?

3. Since we offer a SaaS, we require 100% uptime SLAs, is this a typical guarantee for web hosts, or is this something to look for?

4. Our current web host gives us two 1Gbps ports per server and does something called 95th percentile bandwidth billing. Our bandwidth requirements are quite intense, should we look for 95% billing or an unmetered port (which I know are extremely expensive), or...?

5. We currently have 2-hour turnaround time for hardware replacement, is there better?

6. Given the nature and sheer size of our operations, we desire a more personal relationship with our web host. This is why we elected a small, reputable host so far, but because they are so small they cannot handle support during non-regular business hours which is not good at all for us. If we switch to one of the bigger companies, do any of them offer personal representatives to deal with us, our account and our servers? Similar to a "Concierge" add-on or something?

I'm sure I'll have more questions after these are answered, so I appreciate ahead of time any web host or anyone else who takes the time to give their 2 cents.

Looking forward to hearing back...

Thanks,

D

[CloudWeb]

Welcome to WHT. That's quite a few questions, but I'll do my best to help:

1) You may wish to look for a small VPDC (Virtual Private Data Center) as it combines Dedicated servers, with Cloud hosting technology. You would then have reliability, scalability, load balancing, and all the goodies with a minimum of two physical servers.

2) Just about any Data Center in the US will do just fine unless your service is extremely latency sensitive. Ie: we're on the east coast and average 35ms latency to our west coast peers.

3) 100% SLA's can be done, but I wouldn't say it's a typical guarantee. You may need to negotiate this with a provider, but depending on the level of credit expect to pay for it. It's insurance, so just like with your car or health insurance, changing the deductible's, adding coverage, etc will change the price of the plan. Look for a happy medium.

4) 95th Percentile is a common method of billing for Dedicated hosting. Many providers bill this way so it's a fair way to then bill their customers. It permits large bursts of traffic. Metered vs unmetered would be dependant on the network and methods used. Some may oversell that, some won't. It all depends on your needs and budget.

5) 2-hour turnaround is pretty good. But if you build your infrastructure properly with full redundancy, this won't even be a concern. We have cloud's running with so much spare hardware we can lose half a dozen servers and it won't even cause a blip. We don't rush engineers into the Data Center in the middle of the night any longer and pass those savings on. 12 years ago obviously we did things very different, but new software technologies may change your way of thinking of what is acceptable with this.

6) Some larger ones may, but you'll probably pay more for it. There are smaller hosts who can meet you in the middle and handle 24/7 support though.

[dman42]

Thanks for the great answers!

As I anticipated, I have a few follow-up questions.

1. You mentioned a VPDC, is there somewhere I can read more about this? I am a tech, not a sysadmin, but I've never heard of such a thing until now.

2. Our service is in fact, extremely latency sensitive. You mentioned getting 35ms, what data center are you in? We are currently averaging only 60ms.

3. I took a look at your website and saw some pretty cheap prices. Then I realized they are all for shared hosting. This may be a dumb question, but are all cloud-based solutions shared? I have seen some that sell bandwidth/disk space solutions, and others that sell CPU cycles. I'm wondering if there's any that can actually guarantee any hardware spec allocation.

Our budget is currently $1000-$1500/month total for the 2 servers. Within this budget, what would, in your opinion, be the best bet for me to go with?

Many thanks!

D

[CloudWeb]

1) Hopefully someone else can chime in.. I actually don't know of any places besides companies marketing materials to read much more about it. But basically it's Dedicated servers + Cloud. Most providers offering VPDC should be able to custom build you a solution exactly to your needs. So it provides the benefits of Cloud, but on a Dedicated platform so you know exactly what you're getting and can tailor the hardware exactly to your needs.

2) We're in Equinix, so there's a ton of bandwidth here to say the least...

3) No, Cloud Web is just a brand/product of our company we do much more actually (and I really am trying not to sound like a sales guy here). A VPDC will allow you to build your environment and it being non-shared. That's the beauty of it. It's a dedicated, custom, private cloud. A VPDC will allow you to guarantee hardware specs and allocations.

That budget should be sufficient for a VPDC depending on your bandwidth. You mentioned that is a lot so you may wish to define what that truly is.

[dman42]

Alright, I'll clarify a bit regarding our bandwidth usage.

Since we are providing a SaaS, our product uses quite a bit of bandwidth. However, I doubt we would ever exceed 20TB of bandwidth in any given month.

I understand 20TB is not even that large for our budget, but it is the speed and consistency of this bandwidth that is most important to us.

Our current web host has supplied us with two 1Gbps ports and a tweaked TCP/IP stack to ensure the fastest speeds possible.

Network latency is one aspect, but the *most* important feature we are looking for in a web host, is the speed by which they can move multiple files from our server to a remote one, and vice versa. Our goal is to be able to move a 10MB file to most geographical locations in less than 2 seconds. Currently we are averaging less than 10.

[mehboobashraf]

To keep things simple, I would suggest you start digging up information on cloud hosting.

Build your own Content delivery network for best performance.

[CloudWeb]

Comparing apples-to-apples, since you're 95th percentile now how many Mbps are you billed for now on average per month?

No matter who you choose, be very careful to not only talk to them about the network, but to test it. Since latency, lag, jitter, etc are all going to be important factors you need someone with a ton of high quality bandwidth of their own. Of course also make sure they OWN their own IP address's so they are not tied to a provider. Beware of low quality bandwidth providers that a provider may use such as Cogent and Hurricane Electric.

Bandwidth is the #1 reason we use Equinix. Equinix is a carrier-neutral facility so there's a ton of providers here. Most of the Equinix tenants are here for this same reason. Otherwise, if you're in a traditional Data Center bringing in bandwidth, selecting routes, optimizing, etc are costly and quite simply, a slower process. I am not bashing any traditional Data Center though as there are quite a few that do a great job at it. It's just a risk I don't personally like after problems I had in the past. When I was last in a traditional Data Center and when their relationships with the carriers went bad, or the fibers became a problem, or whatever it was they had their hands tied. They could not light another provider in less than 24 hours, run new fiber, etc.

[darockProjects]

Originally Posted by dman42

Network latency is one aspect, but the *most* important feature we are looking for in a web host, is the speed by which they can move multiple files from our server to a remote one, and vice versa. Our goal is to be able to move a 10MB file to most geographical locations in less than 2 seconds. Currently we are averaging less than 10.

I will suggest you try cloud hosting as you pay mainly for what you use then you can really scale up as your traffic increases. As long as the servers are in the same Data Center you can easily transfer files at line speeds so the communication btw servers should not be any problem. If you want to be serving the public with such large files, i will suggest you use some form of caching device or strike a a deal with a content distribution network cos your bandwidth usage will be very expensive.

i hope this helps.

[CloudWeb]

They may not be able to transfer at line speeds just because they're in the same Data Center. It's quite possible the lines are capped, IO or other resources are capped, or they are far enough away in that same facility that there are other issued to be of concern.

CDN's are an idea, and may complement his needs depending on what he's doing exactly.

[darockProjects]

WOW!!! Why will any one in their right senses cap the internal speeds within their network, and especially for a dedicated server. Hmmm....May be i still have a lot learn

[CloudWeb]

If a customer is purchasing unmetered bandwidth and a 10Mbps cap.. then that will be capped both in and out of the Data Center which is just one example.

[dman42]

Regarding a CDN, this has been brought up in the past.

Our goal is not to provide high-speed 10MB transfers to users, per se, but to other servers around the world. I feel this is necessary to clarify because servers generally are much faster than home internet connections, and they typically utilize the same or similar network backbones around the globe.

What I'm wondering is, would a CDN really cater to such needs? Or would it just be better to tweak a couple servers to their max network throughput? Or perhaps even just having 2 or 3 geographical locations since most servers are concentrated in particular centers?

Thanks for all the advice so far,

D

[darockProjects]

Thanks for your info and apologies for digressing from the thread but what will a host gain in capping internal traffic? I thought those Cisco switches performs wonders? I promise this is the last question

[darockProjects]

Originally Posted by dman42

Regarding a CDN, this has been brought up in the past.

Our goal is not to provide high-speed 10MB transfers to users, per se, but to other servers around the world. I feel this is necessary to clarify because servers generally are much faster than home internet connections, and they typically utilize the same or similar network backbones around the globe.

What I'm wondering is, would a CDN really cater to such needs? Or would it just be better to tweak a couple servers to their max network throughput? Or perhaps even just having 2 or 3 geographical locations since most servers are concentrated in particular centers?

Thanks for all the advice so far,

D

I will suggest having servers around the world as it will be far cheaper than CDNs. This way you have your own CDN and the servers can easily communicate. I also "think" it may cheaper using the same hosting company around the world as they may want to cut you a deal on the inter-DC traffic.

[CloudWeb]

hehe np.. hopefully the OP doesn't get too upset for straying. haha.

If a provider is providing unmetered and/or capping, a lot of time that is done right there at the edge switch (where the server is connected), or in a cloud, right inside the cloud for the "virtual" ethernet interface. So, if those cases apply then it can't go faster than that speed.

Of course there are ways to do this from a core switch and/or router too, but it just depends on the infrastructure and policies of that particular host.