Multiple Web Servers/Hosts For One Site: Good idea? Is it even Possible?
Hey everyone! Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, and Wonderful Kwanzaa!
If you've already read this on a different forum, I apologize, but I'm trying to get as much feedback on this tangent I've thought up because I honestly think it might work for me. I want to hear your thoughts though...
Quickly, what I'm looking for in a webhost is over 100 GB a month of transfer (For only about 30 MB of HTML/JPG's) to host my website. I have been looking to alternatives to a dedicated and therefore expensive server but have struck out swinging.
Well, a thought struck me and I was wondering if anyone had any feedback to whether this would ever work.
What if I signed up for hosting on two different servers (Say just for argument LiquidWeb and Tera-Byte) using both servers to host different pages of my site. Between the two, I would have almost enough bandwidth and the two top plans together would be around $60.00 a month and would give me around 70 GB of traffic a month combined.
Is it at all possible to do that? As in, can I direct both LiquidWeb and Tera-Byte to one domain or would I need two separate domains that I could somehow connect? Is it even possible/allowed to host one site on two different web hosting companies?
I know it's not the best plan of action to split up a website among multiple servers, but if I this is doable, it would save me a lot of money each month and I think would work great.
Even taking it a step further, could I do this with free hosting? I'm not saying going to 100 different 1 GB a month hosting companies, but just to cover myself GB wise, if I went to one or two free hosts and stored some pages there, that could work too.
As I said, I have no idea if this is possible/ethical/whatever, but it seemed to be a great idea when it was in my head.
All help, as always, is greatly appreciated!
Thanks!
-Scott
Jaiem posted this at 13:53 — 26th December 2000.
They have: 1,191 posts
Joined: Apr 1999
Why not go with a dedicated server?
WestWingSW posted this at 14:46 — 26th December 2000.
They have: 2 posts
Joined: Dec 2000
LOL, I posted my message on a bunch of different webmaster forums and got very similar replies about dedicated servers. So here comes a bunch of similar replies from me :>
The reason why I'm hesitant to go with a dedicated server is because I know NOTHING about Dedicated Servers. Nothing. I've been reading about dedicated servers and people are talking about trace routes and pings and I have no clue what any of that means.
Sure, I could buy books (One post somewhere somebody suggested buying $100 worth of books explaining dedicated servers in detail) but I don't have the time nor the inclination to do that.
Plus, if I went with 4webspace.com's RAQ (Which I would) I'd be spending $100 a month, plus either $111 or $389 o.con extra RAM (Which I guess makes the site go faster, although again I'm not familiar with that) plus whatever books/whatever I'd have to get to understand the whole process.
To me, it's worth it to get two or three different highly recommended web servers, get 3 different 40 GB a month packages for pay around $100 for 120 GB a month with all sorts of goodies from those packages and not have to worry about learning about a dedicated server.
I'm really afraid I'd be lost with a dedicated server, while with a virtual one, all I have to do is upload and be done :>.
I hope that makes some sense and allows you to get at least a little insight on why I'm shying away from the dedicated servers.
-Scott
-Scott
http://www.wrasslin.com/nomercy/
Jaiem posted this at 18:36 — 26th December 2000.
They have: 1,191 posts
Joined: Apr 1999
Seems it's just as nasty running a site that's really broken up amoung 2 or 3 different virtual servers on as many different services.
NSS posted this at 02:12 — 27th December 2000.
They have: 488 posts
Joined: Feb 2000
I do agree with Scott, I too don't want the hassle of maintaining a server and be better off using the time designing web sites and getting more clients. I have about 30 clients now and I used 2 different servers service.
1)For low bandwith sites I used a low cost server with reasonable support for $3.00 to $5.00 per month since my clients are paying me ($200.00 per year contract)
2)I used a reliable server with high bandwith and space costing about $10.00-15.00 per month where I have 5 clients and they are paying me good money($1000.00 - $1500.00 per year contract) so cost is not a problem.
Regards,
NSS
Brian Farkas posted this at 03:40 — 27th December 2000.
They have: 1,015 posts
Joined: Apr 1999
You might consider a "managed" hosting solution... I know that UltraSpeedUSA.com provides this feature, I believe vdi.net does also, as well as rackspace.com
Mark Hensler posted this at 04:29 — 27th December 2000.
He has: 4,048 posts
Joined: Aug 2000
"Dedicated" servers are just that... Dedicated.
That does not mean that you have to maintain it.
A server that you maintain would be "Co-Located". And Co-Located servers are servers that you own, your just renting rack space and bandwidth (both of which can be expensive).
If you get a dedicated server from the right host, they should take care of your machine (which they own).
Mark Hensler
If there is no answer on Google, then there is no question.
anat posted this at 15:32 — 27th December 2000.
They have: 304 posts
Joined: Dec 1999
I had to split my site to two servers because I needed both ASP (NT server) and PHP (UNIX sever) on the same site.
I asked around at the time and from what I understand (and I'm not an expert), you can't refer the same domain name to two hosts. Your domain needs to have your servers DNS's and other technical stuff.
So, what I did instead is I registered a very similar domain name (www.thecatsite.net) and put the .net domain on an NT server (with DIDS) and the .com domain on a UNIX server (with Westhost). The .net site is not launched yet (Netscape compatibility problems
) but you can go over there and have a look at the design. If you visit these two:
http://www.thecatsite.com
http://www.thecatsite.net
You'll see what appears to be the exact same site. The purpose is to let people have the exact same design and layout so that it would look to them as if it's the same site, while being hosted on different servers.
Domain names are pretty cheap these days, and I guess you can pull out the same thing with domain names that are nothing alike - even free hosts. Just a thought - haven't tried that.
I'd love to know what you decide.
Best of luck and happy holidays to you too.
Want to join the discussion? Create an account or log in if you already have one. Joining is fast, free and painless! We’ll even whisk you back here when you’ve finished.