On top of everything you said, I don't believe an OS can support 13,000 IP
addresses, therefore they cannot support that many virtual domains on a
single host. I think there was probably a typo in the original post.
j
At 11:40 AM 7/27/2000 -0600, Nick Call wrote:
>Okay, I am calling BS on this. Total BS. I priced rack-mount servers.
>Even if I could afford a dozen of them in one shot, the discounted cost per
>server never gets below 1300 each for a CHEAP one with no OS or CF. We are
>talking one SCSI hard drive, 512 meg ram, medium-range dual processor, only
>one NIC card, only one power supply. Rack mounts are more expensive by
>nature. My ENTRY level server TOWER with NT, SQL, CF, and e-mail cost me 7
>grand. Welcome to reality.
>
>You are also talking about 13,000 domains on one single server. That would
>require multiple NIC cards, redundant power supplies, RAID-5 array, quad
>processors, some sort of load balancing switch to handle it all, and plenty
>of bandwidth. In my region, you can't get a single T-1 for less than $825 a
>month on a one-year contract, and that's if you know someone and get special
>pricing.
>
>I could go on and on, but the reality is it costs money to do hosting
>properly, period. Way more than a grand.
>
>Also, there are plenty of us running an entire server farm just to handle
>ONE domain! A single rack mount box would melt if you tried to put 13000
>domains on it, even if only half of them were running CF.
>
>Okay, I am ranting. My point is, don't be taken by marketing fluff! If
>Shanje wants to stick by that claim (listed below), I will gladly pay for a
>plane ticket to go down there myself and tour their facility. If it turns
>out to be true, I will move my domains there. I believe they are NOT
>running 13,000 Fusion-driven domains with 99% uptime on a single rack-mount
>box that they will sell me for a grand. More like a couple of boxes each
>the size of a refrigerator.
>
>Good luck!
>Nick
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Cary Gordon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 10:40 AM
>Subject: $1,000 servers (was: High-Powered Scaling)
>
>
> > Yo, Paul,
> >
> > Where can I get a $1,000 server that will run 13,000 domains with 99.9%
> > uptime? I am serious. I am paying about $800 for 512mb of ram on our
>Dell
> > 2450s. At that price, I would have to get everything else for $200!
> >
> > Please tell us. Or, just tell me<g>.
> >
> > Cary
> >
> > At 09:24 PM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:
> > >It would be interesting to see an accurate estimates of price points.
>For
> > >example, http://www.shanje.com/loadbalancing.shtml uses inexpensive rack
> > >units for web/CF servers, about $1,000 each, and hosts over 13,000
>domains
> > >on each server. Shiloh's web farm provides over 99.9% uptime on
>websites.
> > >
> > >So I wonder what the software/hardware costs are, NT vs Solaris, to
>achieve
> > >the same reliability goal of 99.9%
> > >
> > >best, paul
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>----
> > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
> > To Unsubscribe visit
>http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or
>send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in
>the body.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
>To Unsubscribe visit
>http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or
>send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in
>the body.
!j!
The mark of mediocrity is searching for the precedent.
!jeff! sherwood Director of BIGWORDS.com Web Site Design / JEDI
BIGWORDS.com worker#2
.r.e.c.o.v.e.r.e.d.n.e.t.s.c.a.p.e.u.s.e.r. . . . 415.543.1400.x300
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
