WordPress on VPS vs. Shared

Yesterday, 12:40 PM Originally Posted by codydh @novawebhosting: Thanks for your input also. You're right, and that's my fear?that it will work for now, but that some day I will have a big failure and be in a bind to get things back up.That's the problem with inexpensive self-managed VPS. You have to be congratulated for being able to get set up with a small VPS, installing the webserver and your Wordpress sites. And the low price is very attractive. My concern would be that even though these are small sites, they still have some importance to you, and WHEN (not "if") a problem occurs, the cost benefit will disappear. You will either have to hire a server management company at $100+ to fix it, or find another VPS or shared hosting account, and restore from backup (I'm not sure what your time is worth, but I suspect you want to avoid the 8 - 10 hours this would take).

Having a shared hosting account makes a lot of sense. You still need backups, but at least you have a server management team "on call" watching out for hardware issues.

I would recommend a shared hosting account at some well regarded host like MDDHosting.com (I have a VPS there, and I'm recommending them for my larger hosting clients as I divest myself of the business.) Their $7.50 a month hosting plan would serve you well, and people are very happy with the service there.

(Note that hosts cannot volunteer themselves, and users are only allowed to make recommendations for services they have actually used.)

Yesterday, 04:02 PM Originally Posted by fshagan And the low price is very attractive. ......and WHEN (not "if") a problem occurs, the cost benefit will disappear. You will either have to hire a server management company at $100+ to fix itThis is called "false economy". It's when somebody goes for initial price only, and fails to see the long-term costs. I frequently see this with cheap batteries or cheap blank CDs/DVDs. The package contains so many duds that the higher-priced items would have been a better buy, considering long-term expenses.

The same is true here. You may save a few dollars at the start, but lose a lot long-term. Sometimes the damage is catastrophic, loss of all data, when using cheap discs or cheap hosting. And I mean "cheap" both in terms of quality and price -- which is not the same as a low-cost quality product/service. That's why I so often recommend Stablehost for shared Linux hosting.

Yesterday, 04:30 PM I'd stick with the VPS if you have no problems administering it.

MT's shared offering though theoretically would have better uptimes and backup recovery however for your content, is it worth paying 20-40/month for it? Or can you live off 20/yr and do your own backups. It'd be a bonus of AlienVPS has R1, or some other type of data backup process.

Yesterday, 07:19 PM To be honest no particular type of hosting necessarily produces the best execution times of your pages — it's all about how the server's set up, and more importantly how many people you're sharing resources with. Many cheap VPS providers have you sharing CPU with so many other clients you can actually end up with less resources to make use of, regardless of RAM allocations.

In my experience a VPS can offer the fastest WordPress performance, however it requires a fair bit of hands-on work. For my set-up I replaced the industry standard Apache with Nginx, set up PHP in an extremely efficient way, and as a result I can get consistent page execution times of about 0.040—0.060 seconds with a default WordPress installation.

Apache tends to be much more variable (0.100–0.500 on the same system), with a wider gap between the lowest and highest times encountered. Shared hosting makes this worse still. It might require more work, but if you're as obsessed as me with performance and above all consistency then it's the way to go.

As an aside, I use Linode. By far the best VPS company out of the dozen or so I've tried over the years, and the performance of their hardware is formidable. Apparently they have such an excess of CPU power in their system they don't even bother dividing it up like most VPS providers do, and having put it to the test I can agree with what's said.

Yesterday, 08:27 PM IIS 7 is also very powerful. It easily outperforms Apache, and you could argue how well it works against LiteSpeed or even nginx under various usage scenarios. You can also front-end IIS7 with nginx as reverse proxy, if you really want to get interesting. I've not had traffic to demand that just yet, but I have an open dev VPS where I may play around with that config later this year.

Throw on WinCache and your PHP sites will fly.

If sites don't load in less than 1 second, I look for ways to improve every last ms.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.