webmasterbeta
New Member
I am new here so first off hi to everyone.
I am starting a social networking type website and I am looking for the best managed hosting company to host my website. I need a managed hosting company that will have room for growth and affordable rates, especially for bandwith. My website is done in .net so I need windows based hosting.
My question to all you members here is what is the best hosting company for this? Also please let me know of any other things I may want to be aware as far as hosting when starting this type of website.
Some of the features I need are below.
*99.9% uptime
*24/7 phone line
*Daily backups(preferably multiple times a day)
*Very secure
*24/7 server monitoring
*FirewallI think mayby rackspace.com is a good company for this?But they are verry expenvice but the support is great.Well the most easiest thing for me is to tell you "Rackspace". But since you asking for a managed hosting i would add the bst is the one that provides best server management for you.
I don;t thing however that hosting social network is far different form hosting popular forums.If you're worried about the unique scaling characteristics of a social network, then you have several options. The easy option is to learn how to modularize your code in such a way that something like Amazon EC2 makes sense. This gives you the ability to scale up during peaks and scale down almost instantaneously.I host a few social networking sites, and what we've found is really important to them is:- Lots and lots of memory on the database servers- Separation of database servers from application servers from day 1- Extensive use of caching (namely Nginx or apache's mod_cache_proxy for static content, and Memcached for Object and page fragment caching)One of the problems that you're going to run into, is if you grow huge, the technical expertise isn't out there. Social networking sites like linkedin or Friendster require some pretty hardcore math geeks who get excited by Graph Theory... That caliber of coders don't program .net.Check out WiredTree. They have all of the features you mentioned and they mention experience with clusters on their website. That may be useful when your website grows past a single server.what are the choices in the UK?what are the choices in the UK?I'd be surprised if there are any, beyond hosting at Rackspace's London datacenter. Most social networks that I've run across run by UK companies are hosted in US datacenters. A combination of cheap hardware, widely available technicians, pratically free bandwidth, and a weak dollar make the united states *very* attractive hosting options for UK companies. I've got 1/2 dozen customers from the UK who all run social network startups.You can check out Rackspace, orcsweb and handynetworks.Good luck!Careful with Rackspace. Their 100% uptime isn't quite as 100% as they'd like everyone to believe.<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/05/rackspace_uk_power_cut/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/13/rackspace_texas_truck/Most">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/05 ... truck/Most</a><!-- m --> social networks that I've run across run by UK companies are hosted in US
isnt latency an issue?isnt latency an issue?
Latency really shouldn't be an answer. In a social network you're looking at pictures, videos, and text entries. You're not stock trading or video chatting. The latency from the UK to America, especially to the east coast, is perfectly adequate for websites.could you recommend (upgradeable) specification of such machine?
i could find a price range then and compare
thxcould you recommend (upgradeable) specification of such machine?i could find a price range then and compare thxThe right server specification really will vary widely depending upon your application, how well it's tuned, how database intensive it is, and how deftly you make use of caching.Careful with Rackspace.
Their 100% uptime isn't quite as 100% as they'd like everyone to believe.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/05/rackspace_uk_power_cut/">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/05 ... power_cut/</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/13/rackspace_texas_truck/">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/13 ... xas_truck/</a><!-- m -->
The second url you have posted did not happen to rackspaces datacenter. It actually happened to it's low grade subsidary - serverbeach. Serverbeach was low cost, low quality web hosting for the self managed or hobbyist and was owned by rackspace. It is now owned by Peer1.
Also, Someone else mentioned no choices in the UK. Datapipe is in the UK.
As for US hosting, Choopa has managed options that match or exceed rackspace in some cases. In my experience after a while rackspace tends to charge you $150 / hr to configure and do certain tasks. I have seen alot of the same task done for nothing more than your monthly fee at choopa.
However Rackspace is the Ashton Martin of web hosting.
My two cents.The second url you have posted did not happen to rackspaces datacenter. It actually happened to it's low grade subsidary - serverbeach. Serverbeach was low cost, low quality web hosting for the self managed or hobbyist and was owned by rackspace. It is now owned by Peer1.I'd just like to clarify that this is not correct. This did not happen to ServerBeach. This incident did indeed happen to Rackspace hence the news article titles: Rackspace flattened by Texas trucker. The article in the second link states the following:"A major US data centre in Texas was taken out when a truck driver hit a utility pole, sending it crashing into a power transformer.The Dallas/Fort Worth facility, owned by managed hosting outfit Rackspace, automatically switched to power from its own generators when the accident happened, but chiller units failed to re-start."I can suggest you to send your requirements to 3 to 5 dedicated managed hosts you find as good ones. Once they respond to your questions you'll be able to make your judgement.
I am starting a social networking type website and I am looking for the best managed hosting company to host my website. I need a managed hosting company that will have room for growth and affordable rates, especially for bandwith. My website is done in .net so I need windows based hosting.
My question to all you members here is what is the best hosting company for this? Also please let me know of any other things I may want to be aware as far as hosting when starting this type of website.
Some of the features I need are below.
*99.9% uptime
*24/7 phone line
*Daily backups(preferably multiple times a day)
*Very secure
*24/7 server monitoring
*FirewallI think mayby rackspace.com is a good company for this?But they are verry expenvice but the support is great.Well the most easiest thing for me is to tell you "Rackspace". But since you asking for a managed hosting i would add the bst is the one that provides best server management for you.
I don;t thing however that hosting social network is far different form hosting popular forums.If you're worried about the unique scaling characteristics of a social network, then you have several options. The easy option is to learn how to modularize your code in such a way that something like Amazon EC2 makes sense. This gives you the ability to scale up during peaks and scale down almost instantaneously.I host a few social networking sites, and what we've found is really important to them is:- Lots and lots of memory on the database servers- Separation of database servers from application servers from day 1- Extensive use of caching (namely Nginx or apache's mod_cache_proxy for static content, and Memcached for Object and page fragment caching)One of the problems that you're going to run into, is if you grow huge, the technical expertise isn't out there. Social networking sites like linkedin or Friendster require some pretty hardcore math geeks who get excited by Graph Theory... That caliber of coders don't program .net.Check out WiredTree. They have all of the features you mentioned and they mention experience with clusters on their website. That may be useful when your website grows past a single server.what are the choices in the UK?what are the choices in the UK?I'd be surprised if there are any, beyond hosting at Rackspace's London datacenter. Most social networks that I've run across run by UK companies are hosted in US datacenters. A combination of cheap hardware, widely available technicians, pratically free bandwidth, and a weak dollar make the united states *very* attractive hosting options for UK companies. I've got 1/2 dozen customers from the UK who all run social network startups.You can check out Rackspace, orcsweb and handynetworks.Good luck!Careful with Rackspace. Their 100% uptime isn't quite as 100% as they'd like everyone to believe.<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/05/rackspace_uk_power_cut/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/13/rackspace_texas_truck/Most">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/05 ... truck/Most</a><!-- m --> social networks that I've run across run by UK companies are hosted in US
isnt latency an issue?isnt latency an issue?
Latency really shouldn't be an answer. In a social network you're looking at pictures, videos, and text entries. You're not stock trading or video chatting. The latency from the UK to America, especially to the east coast, is perfectly adequate for websites.could you recommend (upgradeable) specification of such machine?
i could find a price range then and compare
thxcould you recommend (upgradeable) specification of such machine?i could find a price range then and compare thxThe right server specification really will vary widely depending upon your application, how well it's tuned, how database intensive it is, and how deftly you make use of caching.Careful with Rackspace.
Their 100% uptime isn't quite as 100% as they'd like everyone to believe.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/05/rackspace_uk_power_cut/">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/05 ... power_cut/</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/13/rackspace_texas_truck/">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/13 ... xas_truck/</a><!-- m -->
The second url you have posted did not happen to rackspaces datacenter. It actually happened to it's low grade subsidary - serverbeach. Serverbeach was low cost, low quality web hosting for the self managed or hobbyist and was owned by rackspace. It is now owned by Peer1.
Also, Someone else mentioned no choices in the UK. Datapipe is in the UK.
As for US hosting, Choopa has managed options that match or exceed rackspace in some cases. In my experience after a while rackspace tends to charge you $150 / hr to configure and do certain tasks. I have seen alot of the same task done for nothing more than your monthly fee at choopa.
However Rackspace is the Ashton Martin of web hosting.
My two cents.The second url you have posted did not happen to rackspaces datacenter. It actually happened to it's low grade subsidary - serverbeach. Serverbeach was low cost, low quality web hosting for the self managed or hobbyist and was owned by rackspace. It is now owned by Peer1.I'd just like to clarify that this is not correct. This did not happen to ServerBeach. This incident did indeed happen to Rackspace hence the news article titles: Rackspace flattened by Texas trucker. The article in the second link states the following:"A major US data centre in Texas was taken out when a truck driver hit a utility pole, sending it crashing into a power transformer.The Dallas/Fort Worth facility, owned by managed hosting outfit Rackspace, automatically switched to power from its own generators when the accident happened, but chiller units failed to re-start."I can suggest you to send your requirements to 3 to 5 dedicated managed hosts you find as good ones. Once they respond to your questions you'll be able to make your judgement.