Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

virtual hosting service recommendation

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

7 messages Options

Brad Fuller

virtual hosting service recommendation

There was a post a month or so ago about a virtual hosting service that
was recommended. I can't find that email. Does anyone have any
recommendations?

Jason Rogers-4

Re: virtual hosting service recommendation

On 11/15/06, Brad Fuller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> There was a post a month or so ago about a virtual hosting service that
> was recommended. I can't find that email. Does anyone have any
> recommendations?
>
>

Do you mean other than seasidehosting.st ?

--
Jason Rogers

"Where there is no vision, the people perish..."
Proverbs 29:18

Göran Krampe

Re: virtual hosting service recommendation

In reply to this post by Brad Fuller

Hi!

Brad Fuller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> There was a post a month or so ago about a virtual hosting service that
> was recommended. I can't find that email. Does anyone have any
> recommendations?

I have been using unixshell.com for quite some time (krampe.se,
gjallar.se etc). It is very price competitive (they were first out to
use Xen and try to keep it as cheap as possible) and I have only had 2
outages - and one was due to their backbone supplier having net problems
and the other was a broken rack that they got a new one and brought back
up IIRC.

You get a virtual server, I use Debian on it but there are other OSes to
pick from. You can do more or less what you want except for IRC traffic
- it is blocked.

I am very satisfied. :)

regards, Göran

Cees De Groot

Re: virtual hosting service recommendation

On 11/16/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I have been using unixshell.com for quite some time (krampe.se,
> gjallar.se etc). It is very price competitive (they were first out to
> use Xen and try to keep it as cheap as possible) [...]

Don't want to push Hetzner more than I already have been doing :-),
but a 39 dollar 256Mram/12Gdisk/256Gxfer at unixshell versus a 29 euro
512Mram/40Gdisk/200Gxfer real box...It's only competitive if you can
live with the entry-level 19 dollar box (which might be enough to host
a simple squeak site, granted)...

Göran Krampe

Re: virtual hosting service recommendation

Hi!

"Cees de Groot" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 11/16/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I have been using unixshell.com for quite some time (krampe.se,
> > gjallar.se etc). It is very price competitive (they were first out to
> > use Xen and try to keep it as cheap as possible) [...]
>
> Don't want to push Hetzner more than I already have been doing :-),
> but a 39 dollar 256Mram/12Gdisk/256Gxfer at unixshell versus a 29 euro
> 512Mram/40Gdisk/200Gxfer real box...It's only competitive if you can
> live with the entry-level 19 dollar box (which might be enough to host
> a simple squeak site, granted)...

I actually have a 50% upgraded "Plan 128" that I pay $20 for (upgraded
when they moved to Xen 3.0).

But I run 3 squeak instances + apache, email, ftp, bittorrent
tracker/seeder and probably a bunch more stuff. And I guess I could do
that with a regular 128 minus a squeak or two.

And $20 is about half of 29 euro. But I agree, for the higher level
Hetzner sounds very good - do they use english these days? :)

regards, Göran

Brad Fuller

Re: virtual hosting service recommendation

In reply to this post by Jason Rogers-4

Jason Rogers wrote:
> On 11/15/06, Brad Fuller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> There was a post a month or so ago about a virtual hosting service that
>> was recommended. I can't find that email. Does anyone have any
>> recommendations?
>>
>>
>
> Do you mean other than seasidehosting.st ?
Yep. Too small and I need to store files.

Giovanni Corriga

Re: virtual hosting service recommendation

In reply to this post by Göran Krampe

Il giorno gio, 16/11/2006 alle 13.11 +0200, [hidden email] ha scritto:

> Hi!
>
> "Cees de Groot" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 11/16/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > I have been using unixshell.com for quite some time (krampe.se,
> > > gjallar.se etc). It is very price competitive (they were first out to
> > > use Xen and try to keep it as cheap as possible) [...]
> >
> > Don't want to push Hetzner more than I already have been doing :-),
> > but a 39 dollar 256Mram/12Gdisk/256Gxfer at unixshell versus a 29 euro
> > 512Mram/40Gdisk/200Gxfer real box...It's only competitive if you can
> > live with the entry-level 19 dollar box (which might be enough to host
> > a simple squeak site, granted)...
>
> I actually have a 50% upgraded "Plan 128" that I pay $20 for (upgraded
> when they moved to Xen 3.0).
>
> But I run 3 squeak instances + apache, email, ftp, bittorrent
> tracker/seeder and probably a bunch more stuff. And I guess I could do
> that with a regular 128 minus a squeak or two.
>
> And $20 is about half of 29 euro. But I agree, for the higher level
> Hetzner sounds very good - do they use english these days? :)

I have both an Unixshell# server ("Plan 64", 50% upgraded) and an
Hetzner one (DS1000).

Unixshell# pros:
- Can use CentOS on it, with no extra cost
- very good network, with low latency.
- good support

Unixshell cons:
- can't have IRC (neither clients nor servers)
- no automatic backups, unless you pay an extra (you have to manually
download a tar.gz of your system)
- there can be some conflicts between the Xen system and programs that
use threading.

Hetzner pros:
- a real system, not a partition on a bigger server.
- can install whatever you want on the server.
- automated backups included in the package.

Hetzner cons:
- no Red Hat/CentOS system available, unless you pay an extra.
- network latency is good, but not as good as unixshell#'s.

The lack of backups on the Unixshell# server made me move the main
services of corriga.net to Hetzner; I'm still keeping the Unixshell
server to run some secondary services.

Giovanni