IPB forum

[President Evil]

does anyone know how well IPB forum software will run on these servers?

right now im doing cloud hosting directly through them and they are charging up the ass.

I have the 40 member plan ($30/month) and if the average number of clients on at any one time raises the average in 48 hours goes above 40 they bump you up to the next higher plan

and when I say clients, that means anyone, guest, random people viewing your site, registered members, banned members

so this is very idiotic and I want to just buy the licensed software and install it on one of NFO's webservers and save alot of money


the problem is I don't know how demanding IPB is and how well it would actually run

[soja]

We run IPB on an unmanaged 3-core VDS with SSD space for the database and it performs great!

I don't think John likes me pointing this out, but web hosting here is split into 3-core VDS's(99% sure).

I am not sure if this goes for all web hosting machines, but sql is hosted on SSD for you. Our performance is great on our 3-core, but IPB is quite a resource hog. We hover around 30-50% CPU usage of our 3 cores(E5-2690 cores) with about 50 people actively browsing the forum.

It is worth noting our usage will differ from yours, we have ~20 game servers linked to MySQL and that eats a lot of CPU.

We are using the default IPB pack and the IP.Content addon.

This is our site on, like I said, a 3-core VDS, with SQL on SSD in NYC: http://gflclan.com

[kraze]

I don't think John likes me pointing this out, but web hosting here is split into 3-core VDS's(99% sure).

It's not entirely a secret. Running our webhosting from internal VDS's makes sense. They can be easily scaled and maintenance can be done on each instance without affecting many users. Since webhosting isn't entirely resource heavy(CPU wise) the overhead from being in a virtual environment isn't a big deal.

[soja]

I don't think John likes me pointing this out, but web hosting here is split into 3-core VDS's(99% sure).

It's not entirely a secret. Running our webhosting from internal VDS's makes sense. They can be easily scaled and maintenance can be done on each instance without affecting many users. Since webhosting isn't entirely resource heavy(CPU wise) the overhead from being in a virtual environment isn't a big deal.

I completely agree. However when I mentioned it before, John replied asking me not to poke around and see how things are run behind the scenes. I only mentioned it this time because I think the performance can be compared between our 3-core unmanaged and the web hosting here.

[kraze]

I don't think John likes me pointing this out, but web hosting here is split into 3-core VDS's(99% sure).

It's not entirely a secret. Running our webhosting from internal VDS's makes sense. They can be easily scaled and maintenance can be done on each instance without affecting many users. Since webhosting isn't entirely resource heavy(CPU wise) the overhead from being in a virtual environment isn't a big deal.

I completely agree. However when I mentioned it before, John replied asking me not to poke around and see how things are run behind the scenes.

I believe that was related to accessing files which shouldn't have been accessible.

[soja]

while you were making guesses as to how we internally provision our webhosting machines. I do not consider these things that we should generally be discussing.

Context: http://www.nfoservers.com/forums/viewto ... 793#p49929

You may be right, but that is not how I saw it initially.

[President Evil]

so for the standard webhosting plan it says "Simultaneous connections" 100

does that mean only 100 people max can go on the site at one time?

[soja]

That is best answered here: http://www.nfoservers.com/forums/viewto ... =19&t=7184

100 connections should be plenty for a VERY active website. The exception might be large servers using the site as "fastdl". We do reach the cap of 100, rarely, with ~20 active srcds game servers.