Looking at getting my first deticated server, have questions

[FastSS]

Hi, I've been thinking about getting my first deticated server. I currently have 2 virtual accounts with two different hosts, total of 6 active domains, 4 more that are only email and a redirect, and use about 100 gigs a month total. space taken up is only about 95 megs.

I'm sure my questions would be better answered by whoever I get to host.
But I like to get unbiased answer if I at all can.


I was looking at a P4 2.8 with a gig of ram and 2 80 gig ide hard drives.

Now looking at that and having biult many computers my mind tells me that the ide drives seem like they will be the most limiting part of the server.

My sites are hugely database driven dynamic sites. Will having email, data bases, and all content on one server hinder me in anyway?
My soon to be released websites and plans will take me into to 10 active sites, all dynamic and database driven. and should use about 1400 gigs transfer a month.

Will the listed single server still be able to handle that without slowing down?



Most placed run redhat, but the place I am looking at offers well anything I want, freebsd, red hat, windows, whatever.

I figure Redhat of freebsd would be the best, but how do I pick?


And I'm sure I will need to learn a good amount of commands to be able to do things, where is a good resource for this?



And well in general what do I need to know about a deticted that I didnt have to worry about with virtual accounts?

[tranz]

The server that you picked will work fine. Keep in mind that only you will be able to see on the server if it is running slow. If it does you would want to either upgrade the ram or add another server.

Going with a Linux system will be easier and more cost effective. It will also have everything you will need just about from the get go.

One of the first things you need to do is harden the server. Install protections, close unneeded ports etc. The best way to do this is to go with a managed server provider. Let them know that you need a semi-managed solution. Find documentation on the web about how to harden the server. The semi-managed solution will work out best as it will give you time to learn how to admin a box but will give you some "insurance" if anything gets messed up.

Some people will suggest that you go with a server hardening company. This is ok, but to me is the cheap way out. You dont learn how to do it on your own. "Do you hand the man a fish or teach him how to fish? Get the point....

If you have anyother questions post them here we will help.

[FastSS]

Thanks for the reply :)


Is a control panel worth the extra money? or should I be able to pick up enough about linux to do what I need?
I'm d/ling redhat 9 to install on my old system to play around with, and I'll use it to monitor the server (can I do that?)
It will have its own monitor keyboard, and mouse.

[FastSS]

I'm looking at an unmanaged account with SAGO networks right now.
Looks pretty good and they seem to be a large provider.

What I dont get is how they can be much cheaper then my current host colo-cation.com but be in the same general area?
I know some people with colo-cation that use between 20,000 and 30,000 gigs of transfer a month, but still pay more to be hosted there and not say SAGO, even though SAGO seems to have a great reputation and an equally as fast if not faster network.


How do I make it so that I will have no site down time with a switch? everything is dynamic and changes with every click.

[tranz]

If you want to make sure that you have no downtime then you would have to duplicate your server at another facility and then have an appliacne in place that will route over to the failover point if for some reason they go down.

This is not me saying this, but I just installed a 4TB SAN solution for a client on some servers at Sago. After about a week he wasnt happy with their network and level of customer service he was getting. He is looking to go elsewhere.

Once again, this isnt me bashing Sago, its what my client told me.

Sago gets its servers in **** in doing so they can get cheaper prices. Sago also owns their own fiber lines. When I was in there about 2 weeks ago I was told they are trying to offer other providers pop space in trade for upstream with those providers.

What I found interesting is that Sago orders 1U servers, the case is half the length of a normal case. This allows them to put 2/ 1U servers in the same slot space by placing them back to back. Will this cause servers to run hotter in the long run, it could, but then again thats just my guess.

My client was supposed to be getting 20MB and he was only getting 1MB.

Once again, you have to go with your gut on a provider that you feel works best for you. Just do this for yourself, dont go with the cheapest one. Think about it. Would you want your business to be run on the cheapest servers you could get?

Good Luck.

[FastSS]

Originally posted by tranz:
Once again, you have to go with your gut on a provider that you feel works best for you. Just do this for yourself, dont go with the cheapest one. Think about it. Would you want your business to be run on the cheapest servers you could get?

Good Luck.

You make me uneasy, cause I know colo-cation is the better host, but in the back of my mind think sago would be jsut as good.
But I just cant afford to get a deticated with www.colo-cation.com

If I could I would just for the service, I mean they helped me with a 3rd party script that I messed up, no fault of theirs in any way shape or form, but still helped.

Downtime and slow servers are NOT what I need and thats for sure.

[tranz]

Do this for yourself. Go to the requests section and post a request for offers on a dedicated server. Give the details of the server you want. Let other providers make you offers. At least this way you will have more to compare to.

[drmike]

Originally posted by tranz:
My client was supposed to be getting 20MB and he was only getting 1MB.

I'm curious. What did they have to say about this?

-drmike

[tranz]

It went back and forth. It was the SAN solution, NOT...Then they said that the Cisco router they supplied wasnt running in full duplex. Nope, that wasnt it either, then it was an overall issue with the router.

Client noticed that the speed decreased during the day or business hours and picked up at night.