Need a SSD dedicated server unmanaged TODAY

[StariaDaniel]

As one of our secondary hosters baffled us with incompetence today we need an alternative to move a bunch of sites quickly - preferrably setup today or tomorrow. US-based preferred, but doesn't matter that much.

Need the following specs:
- Quad Core (pref. Intel)
- 8-12 GB Ram
- 2 SSD 80GB or more (mirrored, software raid would be OK)
- Unmanaged / root access
- Debian Linux

Leave an offer here or contact me at [email protected]

[EddyTheDog]

https://www.digitalocean.com/

You can be up and running in 10 mins - SSD as standard....

[Choopa_Pardo]

emailed....

[TurboAngel]

The guy's at NatNet can help you.

[shake]

Originally Posted by EddyTheDog

https://www.digitalocean.com/

You can be up and running in 10 mins - SSD as standard....

Some applications running over virtualization will loose a lot of speed, even if SSD is running on the underlying hardware. If they are database heavy, they should stay dedicated "bare metal", otherwise something like digitalocean might be good.

[Supz]

Originally Posted by shake

Some applications running over virtualization will loose a lot of speed, even if SSD is running on the underlying hardware. If they are database heavy, they should stay dedicated "bare metal", otherwise something like digitalocean might be good.

Not really true. The only thing that really does not perform well on virtualization is low latency trading. And it performs OK. Just not up to standards of low latency. You wont have any database issues though. The speed that you lose in virtualizations is miliseconds.

[Catalyst]

hit up scooter at mojohost.. he will take care of you.. great support.. great servers.

[StariaDaniel]

Originally Posted by EddyTheDog

https://www.digitalocean.com/

You can be up and running in 10 mins - SSD as standard....

Sorry, not a dedicated box ;) Looks like a fun thing thought - but nothing I'd try in production environment

Originally Posted by Choopa_Pardo

emailed....

Thanks, got it, replying right now.

Originally Posted by TurboAngel

The guy's at NatNet can help you.

Yeah, they emailed me. Thanks for forwarding

Originally Posted by shake

Some applications running over virtualization will loose a lot of speed, even if SSD is running on the underlying hardware. If they are database heavy, they should stay dedicated "bare metal", otherwise something like digitalocean might be good.

I'll give that a try

Originally Posted by Catalyst

hit up scooter at mojohost.. he will take care of you.. great support.. great servers.

Had contact with Mojo in the past but never got this going. Also - from my memory - they do managed only?

[Supz]

Originally Posted by StariaDaniel

Sorry, not a dedicated box ;) Looks like a fun thing thought - but nothing I'd try in production environment

Thanks, got it, replying right now.

Yeah, they emailed me. Thanks for forwarding

I'll give that a try

Had contact with Mojo in the past but never got this going. Also - from my memory - they do managed only?

Digital Ocean virtual machines is much more reliable then 1 dedicated box. Having 1 dedicated box is like running with 1 shoe on. a virtual machine is on a cluster of machines so if a hard drive fails you dont see any downtime. If your hard drive fails on your dedicated server you are fucked. Welcome to technology 2009.

[StariaDaniel]

Originally Posted by StariaDaniel

- 2 SSD 80GB or more (mirrored, software raid would be OK)

Originally Posted by Supz

If your hard drive fails on your dedicated server you are fucked. Welcome to technology 2009.

Mirroring and backups existed before 2009

(also clusters and high-availability for things more important than blogs)

PS: Don't get me wrong, yes, these services have their advantages for sure, I would just like to try them seperately, not with live sites

[Catalyst]

I don't know if they do "unmanaged" per say..

however they will provide you root access.. and then you can do what you want..

[EddyTheDog]

Originally Posted by stariadaniel

mirroring and backups existed before 2009

(also clusters and high-availability for things more important than blogs)

ps: Don't get me wrong, yes, these services have their advantages for sure, i would just like to try them seperately, not with live sites

......

........

[CYF]

SecuredServers

[StariaDaniel]

Got a great Deal from www.choopa.com - easy communication, fast setup and a nice price on top of that

[Supz]

Originally Posted by StariaDaniel

Mirroring and backups existed before 2009

(also clusters and high-availability for things more important than blogs)

PS: Don't get me wrong, yes, these services have their advantages for sure, I would just like to try them seperately, not with live sites

Mirroring? This is not mirroring. are you familiar with virtualization? do you understand what it does? Here are some of the statistics of people who use virtualization in production.

100% of Fortune 100
100% of Fortune 500
99.5% of Fortune 1000
100% of Fortune Global 100
98% of Fortune Global 500

People dont cluster or use high-availability anymore without virtualization.

[StariaDaniel]

Originally Posted by Supz

Mirroring? This is not mirroring. are you familiar with virtualization? do you understand what it does? Here are some of the statistics of people who use virtualization in production.

100% of Fortune 100
100% of Fortune 500
99.5% of Fortune 1000
100% of Fortune Global 100
98% of Fortune Global 500

People dont cluster or use high-availability anymore without virtualization.

I say again "I know about the advantages" - just didn't want to try it in productions without properly testing it before

Anyway, a Fortune 500 company usually controls the complete hardware, have staff in the DC (or their own DC ...) - that's kind of different of trusting a 3rd party with it - and way more costly. Also, just because they use it in production it doesn't mean they solely rely on it.

Additionally you need to keep off-site backups for yourself anyway no matter how "secure" you think something is (imagine a host going broke, fire/fatal accident in a DC, roque employee calling an rm -rf *, whatever) - like big companies "cloning" their DC completely a few hundred miles away, use tape storage systems, etc...

[TidalWave]

Daniel,

This is no problem for us at all.
Your choice of datacenters -- Los Angeles, Dallas, or Miami.

Online within a couple hours.

[Supz]

Originally Posted by StariaDaniel

I say again "I know about the advantages" - just didn't want to try it in productions without properly testing it before

Anyway, a Fortune 500 company usually controls the complete hardware, have staff in the DC (or their own DC ...) - that's kind of different of trusting a 3rd party with it - and way more costly. Also, just because they use it in production it doesn't mean they solely rely on it.

Additionally you need to keep off-site backups for yourself anyway no matter how "secure" you think something is (imagine a host going broke, fire/fatal accident in a DC, roque employee calling an rm -rf *, whatever) - like big companies "cloning" their DC completely a few hundred miles away, use tape storage systems, etc...

Off-site back ups and having a redundant infrastructure have nothing to do with each other. Having 1 dedicated server = many single points of failure. Being hosting on a virtualization playform (if created correctly) = 0 points of failure. Great, you have offsite back ups. How long will it take you to restore, compared to rebooting a server if you have hardware failure.

Lets say you do have offsite back ups. They are 200GB. Your server breaks. The steps you need to take are simple.


Choice 1. Dedicated Server.
1. Get a new server.
a. Your host must have exact server in stock,
2. The OS needs to get installed.
3. You have to grab your backups from other location.
4. You have to extract backups and re-configure server from backups.

Choice 2. Cloud/Virtualization Server
1. Do nothing.

Do you know how much easier it is to backup and restore a virtual machine compared to a regular hosted OS?

Most companies do whats called. Disk to Disk to tape Backup, if they are still using tapes. The only people still using tapes are the ones that either have it as a regulatory compliance or because they have it in some company guidelines. Most up to date companies are doing Disk to Disk to Cloud.

If you know the reasons there really should be a choice. If you think most companies don't use virtualization in production. You are just misinformed or un-educated on the topic. Get a VM from Rackspace. They wont go out of business. If you are worried that your host might go out of business. You are probably with the wrong host in the 1st place.

[FlowerKid]

It's a good strategy to trust only yourself. So it's always good to have a backup by your own or another hosting company.

[AndrewX]

I would like to offer you the following plan at XenLayer.com:

- Core i7-3770 Quad Core 3.4 GHz
- 16 GB DDR3 Memory
- 120 GB SSD x2 hardware RAID-based setup
- 10,000 GB Monthly Transfer
- $249/month

How does this sound to you? Your contract with XenLayer includes full system management. We will:

- Migrate your current websites
- Install the services and scripts you need
- Configure your system software
- Help you out with whatever you need
- Perform updates, patches and periodic checkups
- Monitor your servers for resource usage and abnormal activity

Feel free to hit me up on ICQ or mention this deal to us after registration, I cannot guarantee today but we can have you up and running within 48 hours.