document updated 21 years ago, on May 24, 2005
According to my webserver stats, other people use about 50mb a day of bandwidth in web pages... and I get a hit about every 80 seconds. So I should have absolutely no problems with the lowest tier of virtual web servers, even if I run the memory-hogging mod_perl, and split the server with a few friends.
UML-based
- linuxvds — $20/mo, $10 setup, daily backups, 48mb ram, 1gb disk, 10gb xfer
- linode — $20/mo, $10 setup, no backups, raid, 64mb ram, 3gb disk, 25gb xfer
(reviews: one)
- jvds — $20/mo, $0 setup, daily backups, raid, 64mb ram, 3gb disk, 20gb xfer (reviews: one)
- tektonic — $15/mo, $1 setup, raid, 64mb ram, 3gb disk, 50gb xfer
(reviews: one)
- redwood virtual — $10/mo, ? setup, raid, 64mb ram, 2gb disk, 10gb xfer
Virtuozzo-based
LinuxVDS says that mysql won't work with their lowest amt of memory (48mb), so mod_perl could similarly have potential problems?
On the other hand, something on the order of 2 gB / mo webhosting probably wouldn't piss off my cable ISP, even with the $45/mo plan. But the benefits of a VPS are:
- Much lower up-front costs
- Theoretically higher uptime
- Don't have to deal with hardware issues
- Can share the costs with others because it's very unlikely that there be prolonged downtime, and final ownership is with a 3rd party
While a RAID-at-home solution would have these benefits:
- Pro: For not *too* much up-front costs, could have a lot more memory, disk space, and multiple UML partitions
- Con: Possibility of cable company getting pissed
- Con: $45/mo cable plan = not fast enough to stream MP3s. $80/mo cable plan = way more $$$ than VPS or sticking with 68k.org, and instantaneous upload speeds lower than both as well
- Pro: Local RAID = easy backups of all multimedia files