2 SDX accounts, 1 website?

[FreeFall]

hello,

I am just wondering if something like this is possible, in 2 different cases..

1)
can i have a www.site.com on one sdx account, and have www.site.com/forums on another

2)
could i split my site to 2x SDX accounts, so 1 could just be for MYSQL (or something else) and the other could be for everything else.


Just wondering (cue people saying "you get a dedicated server..." )

[jason]

Scenario 1: You could certainly set it up so that forums.site.com was on a separate server. Though technically possible to do what you want with www.site.com/forums, you'd need to use a proxy (via mod_proxy) to pull the requests from the forums server through the www server. Depending on how big your forum is, the resource savings you'd get by doing that are probably negligable and not worth the fuss. mod_proxy may be against the TOS, too, and may not be installed on the servers.

Scenario 2: While this is technically possible, it isn't what SDX is designed to do. SDX is designed to be an all-in-one-box hosting solution.

You could certainly do all of this with a couple of dedicated servers (or VPSes).

--Jason

[Vin DSL]

Scenario 3: Use a wrapper.

I run these JagPC Forums in one of my beta projects - in a subdomain on my SDX account...

Example: http://joomla.lenon.com/index.php?op...e r&Itemid=53

[the_ancient]

I have asked about this before, JPC has no problem with using subdomains on differant accounts.

so you should have

www.youdomain.com -> SDX1
forums.youdomain.com -> SDX2

etc.

[FreeFall]

thanks, it all sounds good. The only reason why i'd want /forums/ instead of a subdomain is for seo; google would treat it as a different site. So i may use a ssperate domain anyway.

My site gets no where near the allowed usage per day, when its busy around 2gb/day; but if i have a forum it would drive it up and i dont want to move to a dedicated for it.

[Ron]

How many visitors/pageviews per day to you expect?

BTW, if you put it on a subdomain (forum.domain.com), you'd be able to have it on your SDX now and then migrate the forum to another SDX account if you really wanted/needed to.

I don't think there's much of a difference nowadays with Google and different sites/subdomains/subdirectories. G is smart enough to understand subdomains and given the same linking structure, I'd guess the pages of the forum would have virtually the identical ranking, as would the main domain. Some have suggested in the past that shorter URLs are better, and others have thought that descriptive subdomains are better. But nobody knows for sure.

What's your concern?

[Gwaihir]

I would NOT put only MySQL on a seperate account. You will cause heavy traffic between the two accounts, over the main network. This is unnecessary load and will eat into your bandwith allowance.

In a professional setup when the SQL server is placed on a different machine than the webserver they will be connected over a seperate network (which might be as small as a direct cable between the two machines).

I can't help but wonder though: won't JagPC be able to simply offer a "double SDX"? I.e. pay for two SDX accounts but instead get a single one with double allowances?

[Ron]

While I wouldn't try to use an SDX account as a database server (primarily because the SDX isn't a dedicated box anyway) I wouldn't worry too much about MySQL traffic on the local switched gigabit network. I also would be surprised if CPanel's bandwidth accounting breaks out server-level MySQL communications by user account.

Back in the day, some databases maintained cursors on the server only and didn't retrieve them en masse to the client, so there could be some latency issues while processing cursors on the client side, especially with small results rows and TCP/IP communications schemes that had the Nagle algorithm enabled. Nowadays I'd guess that problem doesn't exist any more.

I never had a database server on a separate network. Even then we had switches which limited the impact of machine-to-machine communication to those machines and the switch.

[Pawel Kowalski]

I run a web site where I have to use an outside database server. The web site is hosted here on a vps and the database is in another datacenter in Texas. I have not done any kind of measuring at this point of how much bandwidth this takes up but it seems to be extremely minor and I haven't seen any kind of performance issues.

You would be able to host the database on one SDX while your web site is hosted on another SDX. And since both servers would be in the same datacenter you would see minor latency. You might even want to contact Jag to see if they would allow you to communicate with these 2 servers using an internal private network.

[JPC-Greg]

I can't help but wonder though: won't JagPC be able to simply offer a "double SDX"? I.e. pay for two SDX accounts but instead get a single one with double allowances?

We have our new Hybrid product now and Im uploading info on it today. Think fully managed vps sdx, $97 managed product with 2gb ram, 100gb raid space, datalockbox, cpanel, 2-3 clients per physical machine, full root though so you can resell from it if you wanted. Or $177 with a 4gb ram, 200gb space version. We're trying to get more managed products mean for big resources under the $200 mark.

Ive removed our orbiter dedicated server because its obsolete with this.

On the sdx plans, I dont see marking up a double sized plan for double the price to be very beneficial, just buy two seperate plans and be better diversified for the same money. So I don't plan to offer a 2x sdx plan. Vps and the new hybrids fill the product line gaps in my opinion.

[the_ancient]

I would NOT put only MySQL on a seperate account. You will cause heavy traffic between the two accounts, over the main network. This is unnecessary load and will eat into your bandwith allowance.

In a professional setup when the SQL server is placed on a different machine than the webserver they will be connected over a seperate network (which might be as small as a direct cable between the two machines).

I can't help but wonder though: won't JagPC be able to simply offer a "double SDX"? I.e. pay for two SDX accounts but instead get a single one with double allowances?

That would really depend on how JAG sets the accounts up, how the Routers are set up at the data center and if local IP address between accounts would be available

None of which I know the awnser to, but to make a blanket statement like that with out knowing the inner workings of the network is premature IMO

[FreeFall]

How many visitors/pageviews per day to you expect?

BTW, if you put it on a subdomain (forum.domain.com), you'd be able to have it on your SDX now and then migrate the forum to another SDX account if you really wanted/needed to.

I don't think there's much of a difference nowadays with Google and different sites/subdomains/subdirectories. G is smart enough to understand subdomains and given the same linking structure, I'd guess the pages of the forum would have virtually the identical ranking, as would the main domain. Some have suggested in the past that shorter URLs are better, and others have thought that descriptive subdomains are better. But nobody knows for sure.

What's your concern?

i couldnt say how busy it will be. I just dont want to be in a position where i have to move to a dedicated for the sake of adding something like a forum.

We have our new Hybrid product now and Im uploading info on it today. Think fully managed vps sdx, $97 managed product with 2gb ram, 100gb raid space, datalockbox, cpanel, 2-3 clients per physical machine, full root though so you can resell from it if you wanted. Or $177 with a 4gb ram, 200gb space version. We're trying to get more managed products mean for big resources under the $200 mark.

This sounds good to me

Basically what i want in an ideal world is a fast secure server with plenty of support and resources. Personally i dont care about reseller, or even having root access, special setup, different Os's etc. i dont need it. Even HDD space isnt really an issue for me.
Last time i had a dedicated it was a nightmare. I know nothing about servers, i cannot admin it, i have no time or knowledge.

The hybrid product sounds interesting

[Ron]

OK, here's my recommendation based on what you want to do:

Put the forum up on your SDX on a subdomain.
If it gets busy, migrate the forum onto it's own SDX.
If it gets really busy, go with the VPS SDX Greg mentioned.

Without knowing your userbase, I can't be sure what kind of level of activity you could expect from your forum, but unless you've got a really big show, the SDX or the VPS DSX should handle it. If not, you're going to need to raise revenue sufficiently to afford someone to manage a couple of servers for you, which should be doable with such a busy site.

[Gwaihir]

That would really depend on how JAG sets the accounts up, how the Routers are set up at the data center and if local IP address between accounts would be available

None of which I know the awnser to, but to make a blanket statement like that with out knowing the inner workings of the network is premature IMO

What do you mean by local IP address? Shared accounts standard don't come with their own IP and any additional IP addresses you assign to a box on the same NIC must be from the same range, as far as I know. Such traffic will of course not make it any further onto the net than it needs to, but it is external to the box. As such, it can be counted towards your bandwith use, so I think you should definately check that out, rather than just assume it won't. E-mail is usually a small factor too, yet it is counted here: SMTP, POP3 and IMAP.

Of course, it can be that JagPC uses a seperate internal network (with a seperate NIC for it in each machine), perhaps for backups and such. But since it's never been mentioned publicly, I find it highly unlikely that it would be made available to connect two SDX accounts.

I just don't really understand why people want to play multi machine setup with their site when they've not yet grown to occupy one whole machine (unless it is for redundancy, which this isn't).

Given Greg's response to the double sized SDX suggestion, I guess when you've outgrown SDX but are not yet ready for the 100$ solution, you could ask for two accounts on the same box and then use MySQL on one account and the webserver on the other. That's the only two account situation in which there really is a "local".

However, this only makes sense to me if all the load is on the forum. If site/forum are closer to 50/50 (even 30/70 would do IMHO), I'd go with Ron's suggestion instead: split off the forum as a whole, i.e. site and database.

[Ron]

I just don't really understand why people want to play multi machine setup with their site when they've not yet grown to occupy one whole machine (unless it is for redundancy, which this isn't).

Amen

The answer usually goes something like this:
1) A database server is a database server and a webserver is a webserver.
2) It's for security.
3) You see, there were these 5 monkeys in a cage....

1 Made more sense when resources were very limited on machines.
2 Is kind of silly. If I've got your webserver in my pocket and you make calls to your database server from it, I've got your database in my pocket. It makes more sense to segregate applications than services.
3 Is always the correct and winning argument. "That's the way it's always been done around here." Google it.