Dedicated Hosting Recommendations
June 4, 2007 5:24 PM Subscribe
We are hunting for a new Linux or BSD dedicated host. The one we have now, while good - is oriented around resellers - so they are more comfortable working with Virtuozzo and VPS users. We're looking for something kind of stripped down, on a high-end, dual processor box.
We would like the default config to have the latest versions of Apache, PHP, MySQL and Memcached with good connections to a big data center. Support should be at the level that they keep the box patched, assist with keeping out the baddies but otherwise leave us alone. I know this has been asked before, but the most recent post I found was from '05, so I would appreciate current recommendations.
We would like the default config to have the latest versions of Apache, PHP, MySQL and Memcached with good connections to a big data center. Support should be at the level that they keep the box patched, assist with keeping out the baddies but otherwise leave us alone. I know this has been asked before, but the most recent post I found was from '05, so I would appreciate current recommendations.
The Planet is where I host four boxes that run MetaFilter and it works ok. Since they've started acquiring all their competitors their tech support staff have gotten much slower and dumber in my interactions, but I do all my own admin and only have to talk to support about once a year when there's a major hardware failure.
posted by mathowie at 6:02 PM on June 4, 2007
posted by mathowie at 6:02 PM on June 4, 2007
Response by poster: How hard is it to do all your own patching? We're nerdy Web developers but not sys admins.
posted by Dag Maggot at 6:11 PM on June 4, 2007
posted by Dag Maggot at 6:11 PM on June 4, 2007
http://www.johncompanies.com/ is a great service, and they do both Linux and BSD hosting.. read through their site a bit and you might understand what makes them such a cool hosting provider..
posted by WetherMan at 6:12 PM on June 4, 2007
posted by WetherMan at 6:12 PM on June 4, 2007
No offense, but if you're asking how hard it is to do your own patching you probably shouldn't be running a dedicated server yourself. You should be able and willing to follow the CERT warnings as well as your distribution's/OS's security lists, and be very comfortable with the build procedures for all of the software you run, since you may be doing it a lot, and possibly under stress. FWIW.
One problem with what you propose is that if they let you install whatever you want, it compromises their part of 'keeping the baddies out.' Realistically, you're going to either have a managed server where you run what they set up for you, or you're going to manage the server yourself. I'd recommend the former, but don't have specific suggestions.
posted by devilsbrigade at 8:50 PM on June 4, 2007
One problem with what you propose is that if they let you install whatever you want, it compromises their part of 'keeping the baddies out.' Realistically, you're going to either have a managed server where you run what they set up for you, or you're going to manage the server yourself. I'd recommend the former, but don't have specific suggestions.
posted by devilsbrigade at 8:50 PM on June 4, 2007
I cast a second vote for The Planet... I have 3 servers with them right now... however I have to agree with mathowie that their support seems to have coincidentally suffered after they bought out EV1... they've still been reliable and top notch though.
posted by vitrum at 11:33 PM on June 4, 2007
posted by vitrum at 11:33 PM on June 4, 2007
Let me echo devilsbrigade: if you're asking how to do your own patching, you shouldn't be administering your own servers. You want other people to do it for you.
I believe that Servermatrix will offer that service; you give them root access and they'll keep you up to date. But if you need more admin work than that (and you probably will), I think you have to pay hourly. They can be very complete sysadmins for you, but it'll cost a lot more than just the naked box.
If you're absolutely determined to be the people patching, run Debian Stable. It's far and away the most stable of the Linux distros, and has truly excellent response time on security problems. You shouldn't have to patch too dreadfully often on Stable. You can install the debsecan package to mail you a list of vulnerabilities every day, which will remind you when you need patching. When it's time, it's very easy:
If you're replacing the kernel, you will need to reboot, but you virtually never have to restart your server otherwise.
Debian is highly optimized around remote administration, which makes it particularly good for colocation, but it means that the graphic administration tools tend to be sparse. Ubuntu offers more graphical pizazz, and you can run X Windows remotely over Secure Shell to get the pretty admin screens, but I recommend just using Debian and learning what you need. (Ubuntu is just Debian with a facelift and a much faster release cycle, which makes it much better for desktops, but much less suited for server use, IMO.)
Again: if you're asking about how to do updates, running your own server is hazardous. A high-bandwidth machine like that is a super-prime target, and the bad guys are gonna be working you over every single day, probing for a hole.
posted by Malor at 12:41 AM on June 5, 2007
I believe that Servermatrix will offer that service; you give them root access and they'll keep you up to date. But if you need more admin work than that (and you probably will), I think you have to pay hourly. They can be very complete sysadmins for you, but it'll cost a lot more than just the naked box.
If you're absolutely determined to be the people patching, run Debian Stable. It's far and away the most stable of the Linux distros, and has truly excellent response time on security problems. You shouldn't have to patch too dreadfully often on Stable. You can install the debsecan package to mail you a list of vulnerabilities every day, which will remind you when you need patching. When it's time, it's very easy:
apt-get update
apt-get dist-upgradeIf you're replacing the kernel, you will need to reboot, but you virtually never have to restart your server otherwise.
Debian is highly optimized around remote administration, which makes it particularly good for colocation, but it means that the graphic administration tools tend to be sparse. Ubuntu offers more graphical pizazz, and you can run X Windows remotely over Secure Shell to get the pretty admin screens, but I recommend just using Debian and learning what you need. (Ubuntu is just Debian with a facelift and a much faster release cycle, which makes it much better for desktops, but much less suited for server use, IMO.)
Again: if you're asking about how to do updates, running your own server is hazardous. A high-bandwidth machine like that is a super-prime target, and the bad guys are gonna be working you over every single day, probing for a hole.
posted by Malor at 12:41 AM on June 5, 2007
I've had good luck with http://www.1and1.com.
I use their shared hosting, but I also know they offer dedicated hosting. Good bang for the buck IMO.
posted by jammnrose at 1:16 AM on June 5, 2007
I use their shared hosting, but I also know they offer dedicated hosting. Good bang for the buck IMO.
posted by jammnrose at 1:16 AM on June 5, 2007
The place to go for researching a new web host is web hosting talk. I'm currently looking for a new web host so recently i've been lurking around there a lot myself. Browse the dedicated forum to find positive reviews of companies and then: search the forum for more reviews of that compnany, and then email said company to figure out if they're a host that works for you.
What you're looking for sounds like "semi-managed dedicated" or maybe "fully-managed dedicated" server hosting. Each host is going to have their own version of what semi or fully managed means - some only patch on demand and some keep the system up to date on their own. You'll have to figure out what each host provides.
I personally don't need the power of a dedicated system so I'm doing a VPS; and i don't want to be bothered about keeping the OS up to date so i'm going with a fully managed setup. Going with a VPS can save you money if you don't really have that much load on the system.
Alternately, you can get a regular unmanaged dedicated server and hire a "management service" which i haven't used but it seems like common practice.
posted by escher at 7:58 AM on June 5, 2007
What you're looking for sounds like "semi-managed dedicated" or maybe "fully-managed dedicated" server hosting. Each host is going to have their own version of what semi or fully managed means - some only patch on demand and some keep the system up to date on their own. You'll have to figure out what each host provides.
I personally don't need the power of a dedicated system so I'm doing a VPS; and i don't want to be bothered about keeping the OS up to date so i'm going with a fully managed setup. Going with a VPS can save you money if you don't really have that much load on the system.
Alternately, you can get a regular unmanaged dedicated server and hire a "management service" which i haven't used but it seems like common practice.
posted by escher at 7:58 AM on June 5, 2007
This thread is closed to new comments.
It looks like they've been bought out by The Planet, but I haven't really noticed any changes in terms of what I see and work with.
posted by Malor at 5:34 PM on June 4, 2007