xF Host Update

[Adam Howard]

It can be fast as light, but if it's down 99% of the time and when you ask them why, or ask for support, or expect them to do anything to improve the situation and they refuse to respond to any of it, or make any effort to resolve the situation, that speed isn't going to get you very far, is it?

With a 99 % up time ... I've not experienced this issue or the issue others in this thread claim to be having.

In fact during this whole time, our site was only slower, but not down like everyone else.

So I can't comment on the issues people here were having & I respect the fact that I'm not an island and there are other customers (people).

 

[Adam Howard]

Someone read the above and wondered if that was true. For the point of argument and as this seems to affect everyone, I've elected to prove it.

see attached

Site in the last 7 days has been down only for a collective total of 37 minutes ... ie ... when I was working on it & weather related issues.

 

[albi123]

xenforo is not difficult to use

 

[Sheldon]

xenforo is not difficult to use

Awesome 1st post in the most random topic you could find.

 

[Luke F]

First two sites migrated! I can't lie, wicked fast loading!

http://www.tafreehmella.com/ and http://www.turbobuick.com/forums/

Loading pretty fast but on the first one you might want to add a rule to gzip .html files (i.e. taigachat speed mode files)

 

[DRE]

It's common sense if you use hosting. Nobody uses OVH if they care about their customers,they are the definition of cheap junk, shortly followed by BurstNet, then ColoGuys.

Can't go far wrong with Softlayer, although I've had some pretty awesome service from HostDime down in Florida, and SingleHop are decent as well.

I was being sarcastic earlier

 

[RickM]

I was being sarcastic earlier

Ahh ok. Sorry, didnt pick up on it

 

[Ingenious]

Not sure what is to be gained by saying 41ms beats 52ms - I know the number is obviously smaller, but in the real world surely 41ms and 52ms "feels" just as quick? I would say if one was 500ms and the other 40ms, you have a point. But otherwise it's just splitting hairs? Who cares if a site's ping is 11ms slower, if the server is better and the host more robust? Or am I missing the point?

 

[Adam Howard]

Not sure what is to be gained by saying 41ms beats 52ms - I know the number is obviously smaller, but in the real world surely 41ms and 52ms "feels" just as quick? I would say if one was 500ms and the other 40ms, you have a point. But otherwise it's just splitting hairs? Who cares if a site's ping is 11ms slower, if the server is better and the host more robust? Or am I missing the point?

Our setup maybe little different than everyone else's.....

We route our domain through a few proxy servers before it reaches the host. Now add 11ms to each file and multiply that for the total number of files.

Which would make next to zero difference if our site wasn't generically slower than the stock, because admittedly we do have more add-ons than most people (116 at the moment). And routed through a few extra paths.

Again, our site maybe setup differently.

 

[AdamD]

OVH's network isn't the problem (at least, not in recent years lol), it's the customer service/support and the weird policies they have

OVH isn't fit for production/live site hosting.

There's no point posting a review on Webhostingtalk, because that site is full of bad reviews already, which I'm sure Mike knows, so I still wonder why he chose OVH.

 

[Mike Edge]

There's no point posting a review on Webhostingtalk, because that site is full of bad reviews already, which I'm sure Mike knows, so I still wonder why he chose OVH.

Back when we opened, OVH Canada, was getting great reviews. It was like light and day compared to France. The network, was and still is very fast and the hardware is really good. I had called in and spoke to sales, they were very helpful, English wasn't the best, but I knew they were French Canadian and they did speak better English then I could speak French. I had called in to support at different hours. even 3am and a real person picked up every time. So, even to me, it seemed OVH France and OVH Canada were in deed very different.

 

[Luxus]

we do have more add-ons than most people (116 at the moment)

 

[Lucas]

Colo4Dallas ftw! (US only though)

 

[Mike Edge]

Someone read the above and wondered if that was true. For the point of argument and as this seems to affect everyone, I've elected to prove it.

see attached

Site in the last 7 days has been down only for a collective total of 37 minutes ... ie ... when I was working on it & weather related issues.

Yes as mentioned, there was one server, (our newest) that was only power cycled off for a bit over 30 minutes then turned back on. I assume since this is a recently ordered server and only had a few accounts on it, they did not feel the level of mail from this server was "spamming" and turned it back on.

 

[Jason]

Did a traceroute from various locations. They may be carrier neutral, but at least from my limited testing all traffic to Gorack backhauls through Atlanta.

Their mix could benefit from being a bit more diversified. That said, most of the routes to JAX go across Level3 or MFNX to ATL before hitting Comcast back to JAX.

 

[TPerry]

Did a ping test on old location vs jacksonville1.xfhost.net
OVH wins every time
Compared the public domain and also the private IP. OVH still won.

Really?


--- jacksonville1.xfhost.net ping statistics ---
7 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 74.629/82.411/98.125/8.811 ms

--- xfhost.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 9 packets received, 10.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 89.777/95.171/102.917/4.428 ms

 

[Luke F]

I'm getting consistently 15ms worse to jacksonville1 than to xfhost.net, not that it makes a huge difference

 

[Mike Edge]

I'm getting consistently 15ms worse to jacksonville1 than to xfhost.net, not that it makes a huge difference

It's odd as the ping is 10-18ms higher, but everything seems to load faster then it had at OVH.

 

[denisx04]

--- jacksonville1.xfhost.net ping statistics ---
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 297ms, Maximum = 562ms, Average = 410ms

--- xfhost.net ping statistics ---
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 173ms, Maximum = 767ms, Average = 561ms

 

[Mike Edge]

--- jacksonville1.xfhost.net ping statistics ---
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 297ms, Maximum = 562ms, Average = 410ms

--- xfhost.net ping statistics ---
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 173ms, Maximum = 767ms, Average = 561ms

I'm a bit confused why your 410ms considering you said you live right in Jacksonville.. I think it's time to replace the hamster's