Best Hosting provider for XenForo?

[Null]

Why? Do you link to a thread for KnownHost, Digital Ocean, OVH, etc? An individual asks for a name and people provide it.

It's a little different because they don't post here (that I know of).

Don't get me wrong, I've nothing against @Mike Edge. I just felt that if a newcomer comes to the forum, they'll either think XFHost is 'official' or recommended by XenForo (the company), as it's so heavily mentioned.

That's in the past now (it seems) and hopefully there's a little more competition across said industry.

 

[nemke]

Because they are un managed maybe

I have then misunderstood about what this thread is, sorry

Well that and they don't run an actual cloud at all. We had a "droplet" with them for a DNS server and fell victim to their now infamous series of downtime, in which it was discovered they had a dual drive failure on their RAID5 setup. RAID5 instead of a SAN back-end? Yep... no cloud at all. You get what you pay for. The 1 IP limit can certainly be a factor too for some folks.

I didn't see that they said anywhere on their site or blog or any their statements that they use RAID 5, they did disclose what CPU are using and how many ram per server, but I didn't see yet anything about RAID 5, can you please provide me some links?

Although, even if they are using RAID 5, I don't see what is so bad about it? 2 disk fail? RAID 1, two disk fail, same thing, RAID 10, two disk fail also can be disaster? I'm really asking because till now I have used RAID 1 and RAID 10 only and from my experience till now RAID is bad as bad is controller you are using.

Definition of what is what isn't cloud is not industry standard, there are few hreads with this theme on WHT, and till now I have never seen people on them agreeing on what is and what is not cloud.

Bad sides that I agree with:

I agree that having 1 IP per droplet is pretty limiting and can be annoying. Also they are pretty late with implementing IPv6, they have been promising it for at least 6 month now.

 

[WSWD]

I have then misunderstood about what this thread is, sorry
I didn't see that they said anywhere on their site or blog or any their statements that they use RAID 5, they did disclose what CPU are using and how many ram per server, but I didn't see yet anything about RAID 5, can you please provide me some links?

The links were already provided by someone else in this thread. They admitted to using RAID5

Although, even if they are using RAID 5, I don't see what is so bad about it?

If you don't understand what's bad about it, then you don't understand RAID. RAID10 absolutely blows RAID5's performance out of the water any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

2 disk fail? RAID 1, two disk fail, same thing, RAID 10, two disk fail also can be disaster?

True to an extent. No decent host is ever going to use RAID1, so you can throw that out, and RAID10 requires both disks in the same mirror to fail, which happens very rarely. It's very common for multiple disk failures in RAID10 to be recoverable. RAID5 only requires any 2 disks to fail.

Definition of what is what isn't cloud is not industry standard

May not be able to agree on what a cloud is, but I'll tell you what a cloud isn't...a disk failure and your "cloud" is down for days, and completely unrecoverable. Cloud is meant to sustain and failure, and relatively quickly provide a failover solution, to avoid downtime. It should use multiple servers and a SAN back-end for storage, which is not the case with them.

If you aren't getting performance and you aren't getting redundancy, why go with such a "cloud" in the first place? Might as well just get a normal VPS on a RAID10 array.

 

[nemke]

I have then misunderstood about what this thread is, sorry



I didn't see that they said anywhere on their site or blog or any their statements that they use RAID 5, they did disclose what CPU are using and how many ram per server, but I didn't see yet anything about RAID 5, can you please provide me some links?

Although, even if they are using RAID 5, I don't see what is so bad about it? 2 disk fail? RAID 1, two disk fail, same thing, RAID 10, two disk fail also can be disaster? I'm really asking because till now I have used RAID 1 and RAID 10 only and from my experience till now RAID is bad as bad is controller you are using.

Definition of what is what isn't cloud is not industry standard, there are few hreads with this theme on WHT, and till now I have never seen people on them agreeing on what is and what is not cloud.

Bad sides that I agree with:

I agree that having 1 IP per droplet is pretty limiting and can be annoying. Also they are pretty late with implementing IPv6, they have been promising it for at least 6 month now.

I went though whole thread and did find link you were mentioning about DO using RAID 5. Tnx for that, I didn't know that. But looking on that link I saw that they handled it pretty awesome, it wasn't days without response, it was handled for 6 hours which is cool + they did give nice credit to everyone that was on that thread.

I didn't sad never that RAID 5 was better than RAID 10, I'm using RAID 10 and I love it. Problem was that you said because DO is using RAID 5 like that was big deal breaker, that's the part I don't understand. Btw, speed I get when I do tests with dd on DO are great always beetween 200 - 400 MB/s depending on the node.

I know that they don't have self healing VPS's with failover, but again you call that cloud, I don't. For me cloud is just marketing term that this days is put into everything.

 

[seojoseph]

Im using ram node and pretty happy. 'nuff said.

 

[craigiri]

Adding to the backup and failsafe part of this, I just tried an outside bu service and it seems to be working pretty well for my little drone VPS.

I'm using this:
http://myrepono.com/

and have it set to backup my entire web and mysql stuff every 24 hours. The cost seems to be about $3 a month given my small amount of data.

Most of this talk about raid and SSD's and other such stuff is, IMHO, somewhat irrelevant to those who are not very large forums. Most forums don't need backed up or restored by the minute or hour and most don't suffer delays due to regular hard drives - but rather to network latency and other factors. It's kinda like having a Corvette that can do 160 MPH when the speed limit is 65.

As to the "best host" talk - that is always a personal choice based on support needs, location, budget, etc.
My personal preference is staying with the same host for many many many years, as moving is a pain and if that part of my system works, I hesitate to fool with it. Some others seem to switch hosts quicker than they install new add-ons!


I guess they are learning something in the process. You also can see why I've been married for 41 years and lived in my previous house for over 26.....stay the course is my motto!

 

[Slavik]

I guess they are learning something in the process. You also can see why I've been married for 41 years and lived in my previous house for over 26.....stay the course is my motto!

6 "escorts" with cans of petrol heading your way.

 

[TPerry]

Im using ram node and pretty happy. 'nuff said.

RamNode has some GREAT VPS offerings (especially if you get the 30% off deal from WHT). I still have (and will until the time expires) a 1GB with them - but since I have 3 dedicated servers, 1 of which I can configure my own VPS's on, I will let it expire and not renew it.

 

[MattW]

I've been very happy with Linode, and I've just set a VPS up with ServInt that is performing really well.

 

[Blue]

I really should get a linode account and learn how to do the server side myself.

 

[Null]

I've been very happy with Linode, and I've just set a VPS up with ServInt that is performing really well.

I really should get a linode account and learn how to do the server side myself.

I agree with @MattW; if you're looking to have a solid VPS (in terms of infrastructure) and want to learn how to configure a server for yourself, then I'd recommend Linode, been with them for 5 years.

 

[WSWD]

Problem was that you said because DO is using RAID 5 like that was big deal breaker, that's the part I don't understand.

It should be a deal-breaker! It's just not very safe for hosting. How about the fact that they call their services cloud hosting, but don't actually have a cloud? Perhaps lying to potential customers (myself included) would be a major deal breaker? I was absolutely fuming when I found out what they were actually running. It's a horrid setup, and is about as far from a cloud as you can possibly get.

For me cloud is just marketing term that this days is put into everything.

So some company can just add the word cloud to whatever services they offer, without it actually meaning anything, and that's okay with you? Hmmmmm...

Most of this talk about raid and SSD's and other such stuff is, IMHO, somewhat irrelevant to those who are not very large forums. Most forums don't need backed up or restored by the minute or hour and most don't suffer delays due to regular hard drives

And that's generally true, if you run your own dedicated server for your forum. With a VPS (very much a shared environment), that speed matters greatly. You share a VPS node with 20-30+ (hundreds with companies that oversell) other people and the drive speed and RAID type will most certainly matter, contrary to your opinion. To paraphrase your example, you're going to go faster with 20 people crammed into a Corvette than you would with the same 20 people crammed into a Yugo. The size of the forum has absolutely zero bearing on anything, if your VPS can't get ample disk i/o, which is almost always the limiting factor in a hosting server. If the disk is slow, your site is going to be slow regardless of the size. Doesn't matter if you have 5 or 5 million members. A slow site is a slow site.

 

[rdn]

I agree with @MattW; if you're looking to have a solid VPS (in terms of infrastructure) and want to learn how to configure a server for yourself, then I'd recommend Linode, been with them for 5 years.

If they have ddos mitigation feature, then I will

 

[SneakyDave]

Linode has AdSense ads running that they are "cloud" providers also, but it's just their same VPS platform

 

[rdn]

Ouch on the red highlighted portion. I just set up a VPS for an individual on one of their Kimsufi? servers. Talk about slow. Ended up moving his site over to a VPS I created on one of my servers in Florida and it is noticeably faster (and that's on a server using software RAID and is 1.5GB RAM with 1 CPU/2 core with ability to burst to 2GB whereas his original server was 4GB). The setup for him is not a permanent deal since the server is a test bed for me but it will do until he can find somewhere that is priced where he needs it to be and is a good fit for him.

I'm with them almost 2 months, you may test my live forum here, is that what you said as Slow?
And also I created a comparison with your forum
http://gtmetrix.com/compare/BM5sRlfw/zCXEF7mt

 

[TPerry]

I'm with them almost 2 months, you may test my live forum here, is that what you said as Slow?
And also I created a comparison with your forum
http://gtmetrix.com/compare/BM5sRlfw/zCXEF7mt

When logging into HIS site from here - yes, it was slow. Transfers to/from the system via SFTP (Yummy) were a max of 180Kbs. Transfers to/from the VPS I set up for him were around 680Kbs. I think that's a noticeable difference.
And you can't really compare sites. The sayapple site you looked at has 73 add-ons active, another site I use has 94. Unluckily they DO slow it down some but we are talking straight through-put speed in transfers (not to mention the slow laggy feel - probably also related to the throughput speed).

 

[WSWD]

I'm with them almost 2 months, you may test my live forum here, is that what you said as Slow?
And also I created a comparison with your forum
http://gtmetrix.com/compare/BM5sRlfw/zCXEF7mt

Not sure about gtmetrix or which of the datacenters you're using, but it's incredibly slow here in Southern California. Took around 15 seconds to load the main page. I'm sure most of it is just the distance, but it is definitely slower than I'm used to.

 

[MattW]

I'm with them almost 2 months, you may test my live forum here, is that what you said as Slow?
And also I created a comparison with your forum
http://gtmetrix.com/compare/BM5sRlfw/zCXEF7mt

Takes about 2 seconds to load the forum home for me in the UK.

 

[BoostN]

I've been very happy with Linode, and I've just set a VPS up with ServInt that is performing really well.

I'm running ServInt for my forums right now. So far so good, they just introduced a new SSD VPS option I'm going to upgrade to I think.

 

[MattW]

I'm running ServInt for my forums right now. So far so good, they just introduced a new SSD VPS option I'm going to upgrade to I think.

That's what we are running on