Products

Solutions

Resources

Partners

Community

Blog

About

QA

Ideas Test

New Community Website

Ordinarily, you'd be at the right spot, but we've recently launched a brand new community website... For the community, by the community.

Yay... Take Me to the Community!

Welcome to the DNN Community Forums, your preferred source of online community support for all things related to DNN.
In order to participate you must be a registered DNNizen

HomeHomeOur CommunityOur CommunityGeneral Discuss...General Discuss...Hyper-V Hosting ServiceHyper-V Hosting Service
Previous
 
Next
New Post
6/2/2009 2:48 PM
 

I've had nothing but problems while running DotNetNuke on hosted services over the last few years.  I've been through three different services, and I'm still running into daily problems with performance issues.   The frustration of not being able to work on the servers myself to fix the little problems like application pool settings has really irritated me, and some modules simply do not work like they should.   Several "big" projects I've been wanting to do have been on-hold for a couple of years now, waiting until I can get a reliable hosting service.

I've been eyeing up the move to a VPS (virtual private server) solution for some time now, but never could justify spending a couple of hundred dollars a month for the poor low-end VPS solutions I've seen offered before.  That is, until today...

Today, while researching a problem with my Hyper-V system at work, I ran across this hosting service:

http://www.hyper-v-mart.com/

They are offering (as their starter-level system) a Windows 2008 server with 1GB memory and 25GB of hard disk for $49.99/month.  It is a basically a server that you can do a remote desktop connection to and install almost anything you want.  While that is not a huge amount of disk space, it is still significantly larger than most of the hosting services I've seen so far.   Not to mention that you don't have to wonder how many websites are sharing your application pool because "you" are running the server!   Unless there is another virtual server on that host server that is really bogging down the system (which Hyper-V should prevent), I cannot see in any stretch of the imagination how it could be a worse performer than a typical shared hosting service, and it costs not much more than a typical shared-hosting solution!

With that being said however, I don't want to dive into this blindly and will do quite a bit of research on it before I commit to anything.  So, does anyone have any experience with this company or have any other input on this topic?

 

 
New Post
6/2/2009 6:56 PM
 

Hi Dan,

I have been working in VPS environments for three or four years now, and haven't regreted it a second.   I like having access to the server with remote desktop, and working directly with IIS or databases as needed, or havng the ability to install or uninstall any software as I wish.   I am not familiar with the company you mention, but I have been with www.fullcontrol.net from the beginning, and I think their pricing may be similar.  I haven't had any problems, and the support has been excellent.   

 


Terence
TMMworld Dot Net Services
View Terence Maney's profile on LinkedIn
 
New Post
6/3/2009 7:26 AM
 

Thanks for the link... It looks like their starter package is $10/month more, and has lower specs, but it is also much more configurable and it looks like it includes an e-mail service.  Definitely something to look deeper into... I have the feeling there are more of these gems hidden out there!

 
New Post
6/3/2009 8:44 AM
 

 Hi Dan,

As a hosting provider that offers Windows 2008, here's some advice:

Windows 2008 runs like poo on physical hardware with only 1GB of ram.  Because of the resources that Windows 2008 requires, we won't even let customers run it on a server that has any less than 2GB of ram (and we recommend 4GB).

If you're going to try to do anything decent in a VPS...  good luck!

My recommendation is to spend a few dollars and get a physical dedicated server or just do shared hosting.  You'll have a much better performance with both compared to a virtual.

 
New Post
6/3/2009 9:00 AM
 

 Also, if you're planning on running DotNetNuke in a virtual, it will certainly work, however, your performance won't be as good as a physical.  We know this because we used to have an extremely high-end VPS offering, however, all of our customers had poor expierences with performance.  To diagnose the problem, we paid Hewlett Packard consulting a lot of money to come in and tell us what our problem was.  They said we had one of the best virtual setups they had ever seen:  the problem was DotNetNuke.  They said that the reason DotNetNuke performs poorly on virtuals is because the DotNetNuke application is an extremely "I/O chatty" application and that doesn't virtualize well on VMWare or HyperV.

 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeOur CommunityOur CommunityGeneral Discuss...General Discuss...Hyper-V Hosting ServiceHyper-V Hosting Service


These Forums are dedicated to discussion of DNN Platform and Evoq Solutions.

For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, please observe the following posting guidelines:

  1. No Advertising. This includes promotion of commercial and non-commercial products or services which are not directly related to DNN.
  2. No vendor trolling / poaching. If someone posts about a vendor issue, allow the vendor or other customers to respond. Any post that looks like trolling / poaching will be removed.
  3. Discussion or promotion of DNN Platform product releases under a different brand name are strictly prohibited.
  4. No Flaming or Trolling.
  5. No Profanity, Racism, or Prejudice.
  6. Site Moderators have the final word on approving / removing a thread or post or comment.
  7. English language posting only, please.
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out