I'm dropping Godaddy, and moving my drupal websites to a new host. The word seems to be that bluehost and VNhosting architecture is best suited for MySQL intense Drupal. I've heard a lot of people on the drupal forums say that VNhosting is faster than Bluehost, almost unanimously.
After some investigating, I learned that VNhosting doesn't allow PHP to access more than 32MB of RAM? How can this be? I've had sites with almost no traffic, and a medium amount of modules (30-40) crash with a PHP memory error.
Can anyone share their experience with ANhosting.com hosting Drupal sites?
Thanks,
cinqotimo
32mb is a pretty standard level for a shared account type account. If i were you i would look into getting a VPS or dedicated box that way you are in control. Linode for example is great and pretty cheap - although i suppose cheap is a relative term. I expect to pay ~$240+ anually for a hosted server to run 1-2 sites on. This will get me a VPS box at Linode, a GS box at MediaTemple, or a Shared Business or VPS 100 from ServerGrove. Aside from my a dev box at Dreamhost i use primarily for offsite subversion hosting these are the only hosts i ever use.
Of course i only have 1 or 2 Drupal deployments in the wild - most of my stuff is custom work in Symfony or Zend Framework.
Related
My company is considering installing wordpress as intranet blogging platform - nothing really complex, just clean installation without any plugins and layouts (we have a small team of web developers who will be handling layout customization). Wordpress will be installed on one of our servers that will not be exposed to the internet.
You can read a lot about vulnerabilities of the Wordpress platform, but do they really matter if the platform itself is available only within company's intranet? What would be the potential dangers?
Risk is limited quite a bit (as you won't be subject to the random drive-by attacks from bots scanning the entire public internet that anyone with a public server sees many times daily), but not non-existent.
A malicious employee, or a piece of malware designed to attack WordPress would still be possible.
You wouldn't want to neglect patching the WordPress install and its plugins/themes.
If the hacker is also in the intranet yes. But I think in general no. For a good or a Bad just install workfence.
What setup would you recommend for Wordpress website with average daily traffic ~250,000 sessions per day (~130K unique users). In peak hours we can get ~25K users in hour, and non peak ~10-17k per hour.
Monthly bandwidth is ~14TB.
I'll be happy to hear suggestions on what is the best setup:
Note: it should be cpanel server (apache)
Server - cloud or dedicated (all except google cloud and amazon)
CPU/Memory/etc ?
CDN ?
Apache/MySQL specific setup?
High availability?
Any other suggestion
Very appreciated for any advice
It depends what type of traffic do you have?
Is this just one page traffic (bringing referrals from sources like social media, forums, blogs, etc..). Why i'm asking this?
Yes! it really matters.....
Traffic::
Usually traffic brought from sources, browse a landing page there's wouldn't be any unique counts, so in that case your cache plugins can't spend more effort in terms of performance. If users are giving you nice no of pageviews in that case your cache plugin will manage the performance and will give you the best result.
Hosting:
Definitely that you cannot run your website through any shared hosting OR WORDPRESS HOSTING if you are going to have this much of volume. Don't consider having a VPS/Dedicated through any hosting company, it doesn't matter how big that hosting company is. Third party hosting companies will never give you prompt support and will never even guarantee you that if you bring that much of traffic, it will remain as stable as in fully working condition. so consider having VPS/Dedicated hosted in Data Center not through any third party vendors. Try if you could get Cloud VPS OR cloud solution as a service part.
CDN:
If you have good budget then consider using Amazon, Avg. budget use Cloudflare OR MaxCDN.
Hardware: 16GB Ram, 8 Core CPU, 60GB (If you are not planning much updates on your website), 20Gbps Network, 25TB Bandwidth. VPS would do your job and can manage the traffic you considering. I don't think so you should go for dedicated.
Setup & Configuration:
Install Debian 8, Virtualmin (Free) + Nginx and optimize it to use for high traffic. Do not install WHM, don't do this mistake, if you do then you might need premium support to fix issues every single day. Virtualmin is light panel and wordpress is it's specialty. Nginx has ability to deliver high traffic website, mysql optimization, cache management and it can deliver what you looking at.
Themes & Plugins:
Try to go with light wordpress theme, install minimal plugins. Must have plugins are Nginx Helper & W3C Total cache.
There's lot of things on this to talk about, but i think these are important once and should be helpful. Hope my explanation helps you to understand! If you have any doubt feel free to ask...
Attached is the proof of what i explained. This server has configuration of 4GB Ram, 4 Core CPU & Cloud VPS
I have shared webhosting and sometimes i go over the max allowed cpu usage once a day, sometimes two or three times. but i cant really narrow it down to anything specific.
I have the following scripts installed:
wordpress joomla owncloud dokuwiki fengoffice
before i was just running joomla on this hosting package and everything was fine, but i upgraded to have more domains available and also hosted other scripts. now like wordpress, owncloud and so on.
but no site has high traffic or hits. most of the stuff is anyway only used by me.
i talked to the hostgator support team and they told me there is a ssh command to monitor or watch the server and see whats causing the problem.
the high cpu load just happesn for a very short peak, because everytime i check the percentage of cpu usage in the cpanel its super low. the graph shows me the spike, but it looks worse than it really is, because the graph gets updated only every hour, and that makes it hard to narrow it down...
i am new to all this. can somebody help me to figure this out?
BTW:
I hope this question is fine now here, kinda dont really understand this plattform yet...
Just so you have more information, I to host many websites with HostGator using a reseller/shared account. The performance of your site is most likely not an issue, and is related more to HostGator's new servers and it's poor MySQL performance. None of my WordPress sites had issues for years, despite high traffic/plugins etc. Fast forward to late 2013 after EIG purchased HostGator (and others like BlueHost) and the performance on the "new more powerful" servers is anything but. Limits on CPU and processes are more aggressive, and while outright downtime isn't an issue, the performance during peak hours is exceedingly poor. Sites which rely on MySQL databases all suffer from poor performance and no amount of caching or plugin optimization will help (I should know as I spent months reviewing my sites trying many optimizations).
My advice: Find another web host and/or upgrade your hosting to a VPS that can scale based on your needs.
I moved my higher traffic/important clients to WPEngine. The speed difference and quality support is massive.
I'm getting close to finishing a public-facing ASP.Net app and I'm starting to weigh deployment options. I'm an ASP.Net/SQLServer veteran but noob when it comes to Azure. I'm wondering how others have felt about the learning curve to effectively migrate a local dev ASP.Net/SQLServer apps into Azure cloud.
More specifically:
How steep is the learning curve towards understanding administration and programming concepts, and do you think it's worth the investment?
What is Microsoft's support like if I have catastrophic problems from my cloud infrastructure and my live site is down? My expectation is a large price tag for a not-so-urgent SLA.
Will my non-Azure ASP.Net app require significant modification and/or coupling to run in the Azure environment?
Thanks
I answered a similar question a while back, here. Azure has evolved since then:
Azure's AppFabric Cache is currently in CTP (community technology preview) and will go live some time later this year (sorry, I can't quote a date). With a single configuration change, you'll be able to enable the asp.net session state provider without changing any code, and have your session state available to all of your web role instances.
With Azure v1.3 which rolled out in November, you have have the ability to run tasks at startup with elevated privileges (e.g. to run an MSI to install some prerequisite control suite).
For monitoring, you can take advantage of Microsoft System Center, which now supports Azure directly. Alternatively, you can look into 3rd-party options such as AzureWatch.
With Azure's extra-small instance, you can run a site for approx. $44 monthly. You mentioned catastrophic failures and SLA. With Azure, you need a minimum of two instances for SLA to take effect (this is because your virtual machines are located in physically different areas of the data center, in separate fault domains). So you're looking at approx. $90 / month to run a site with 99.95% uptime. Only you can determine whether this is worth it to you. Yes, you can host with a simple hosting provider for significantly less (such as GoDaddy). However, if your site fails there, you have to wait for it to be detected and then installed on a separate box. Also, you share each server with potentially dozens of other tenants, which will impact your site's performance. With Azure, at most 8 tenants will occupy a box, depending on how many cores you configure your virtual machines to use. And it's incredibly simple to scale up or down to handle traffic increases and decreases.
My personal experience is that there isn't much documentation and you have to search through blogs / forums to find answers for more advanced questions. If you have a nicely design app then there shouldn't be much problem with porting - you can google for Azure version of ASP.NET providers, ie. membership.
The biggest disadvantage may be cost: you have to do your maths but for me it turned out that a VPS hosting is much cheaper than Azure.
I would say that unless you get considerable savings on infrastructure don't move to Azure for just the sake of doing it. A hosted server with SQL and IIS will give you less problems and a bit more freedom.
I see an excellent answer by David Makogon already. The following might be helpful for you as well. The last episode of the Connected Show podcast was about migrating Wold Maps to Azure. If you are considering moving to Azure it is certainly worth listening to, as they explain the challenges they faced during the migration.
You could give a look at Moving Applications to the Cloud on the Microsoft Windows Azure Platform in MSDN.
Cheers.
I am a user of an OpenAtrium site, but not the admin. On average it takes anywhere from 7 - 11 seconds for the front page to load. Going from page-to-page takes about 7 seconds.
I am not really a Drupal admin and I definitely do not have access to the host control panel or anything for this particular site.
The admin has mentioned something about cache and has cleared the cache to make it faster, but it still is very slow (see above). This site is not on it's own dedicated server and probably won't be moved to one in the near future. That being said, is there anything that can be done (i.e. anything I can recommend to the admin) that would improve it's speed in the near future?
If you're running it on a shared host with no memory, don't have a PHP code cache (e.g. APC or similar), and don't have Apache tuned, then it's probably slow.
If, on the other hand, you are running it on a Mercury optimized VPS image, it's going to be fast.
We also have it on an internal CentOS server, LAMP, with XCache and it's an improvement over Amazon CentOS LAMP VPS with no XCache.
http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/howto-rhel-install-xcahce-php-opcode-cacher/
We have it installed on our internal server (CentOS) on a tweaked LAMP setup. It's rather nice. I have not experienced any slowness in it.