hosting options

[CarlFK]

I see webfaction is an option. what are the pros and cons of
something like that vs running a VM like slice host?

I can make stuff up, like "they take care of updates" but I havn't
actually seen what all they do and don't do.

[Chris Moffitt]

I don't know a whole lot about webfaction outside of the fact that they do seem to be well respected in the Django community.  I think the choice comes down to how much comfort you have in doing things yourself.  Personally, I like the VPS setup I have at http://www.vpsvillage.com/

I like the VPS option because you have true root access and can configure the way you want to.  The downside is that you need to manage the security/maintenace updates yourself.  If you're not as experienced with Linux admin then, something like Webfaction is probably going to be a simpler option.

-Chris

[CarlFK]

On Jan 15, 2:40 pm, "Chris Moffitt" <ch...@moffitts.net> wrote:
> I don't know a whole lot about webfaction outside of the fact that they do
> seem to be well respected in the Django community. I think the choice comes
> down to how much comfort you have in doing things yourself. Personally, I

> like the VPS setup I have athttp://www.vpsvillage.com/

>
> I like the VPS option because you have true root access and can configure
> the way you want to. The downside is that you need to manage the
> security/maintenace updates yourself. If you're not as experienced with
> Linux admin then, something like Webfaction is probably going to be a
> simpler option.

What I haven't heard is "I can't do X with Webfaction." So as long as
I can do what I want to with them, seems the manage-myself option is
just one more thing to deal with. I have had an apache box for over
10 years, so I know I 'can' do it, I just don't want to if I don't
have to.

I figured the requirements for Satchmo might be beyond what WebFaction
can do. I have seen a few posts like

http://www.djangosnippets.org/snippets/85/ #Handle the Webfaction
case until this gets resolved in the request.is_secure()

But I have a feeling I will run into my own issues, so it might be
better if I am running into the same problems other people are on a
'popular' setup.

I see you used to use Thinkhost: http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/ThinkhostSetup
Why did you switch?

Carl K

[Chris Moffitt]

What I haven't heard is "I can't do X with Webfaction."  So as long as
I can do what I want to with them, seems the manage-myself option is
just one more thing to deal with.  I have had an apache box for over
10 years, so I know I 'can' do it, I just don't want to if I don't
have to.

I think the biggest thing is that if you wanted to use lighttpd, nginix or some other non-apache process, you might have challenges.  If you wanted to install 3rd party libraries, there may be some challenges but they are normally not show stoppers as long as you can manipulate the python path.

The other biggest challenge is managing memory usage so that you're not over your limit.

I do think people have successfully gotten ssl to work with the stock satchmo.  If anyone has, feel free to chime in.

At one point Remi from webfaction had mentioned that they might setup an easy way to install satchmo.  I'm not sure if that has happened or not.

I see you used to use Thinkhost: http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/ThinkhostSetup
Why did you switch?

Thinkhost did not have a good way to control the fastcgi process.  I could never figure out how to reliably restart the darn thing.  It was really really painful developing  on that system.  I would not recommend it.


Keep in mind that I have not actually used webfaction so hopefully someone can chime in with more direct experience with Satchmo.

-Chris

[Bruce Kroeze]

I put all my clients on LiquidWeb or Rimuhosting VPS systems unless they get tons of traffic, then I go dedicated at Softlayer.

LiquidWeb has fantastic support.  Really fantastic.  I've never called and *not* had it fixed by the tech in moments, and I've called at 3am.  I run my own dedicated servers, and *could* host clients, I just don't because I hate getting called for stupid stuff.

Rimuhosting allows Debian, which is just a wonderful thing.  I used to be a forked-Debian maintainer for a hardened Linux distro, and to this day it is my favorite flavor.  A lot less handholding, but another first-class operation.

IMHO, Softlayer cannot be beat for dedicated servers, for many many reasons I'd be happy to go into, but won't because it is overkill for most people here.

[John Shaffer]

On Jan 15, 2008 4:14 PM, CarlFK <cfka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I figured the requirements for Satchmo might be beyond what WebFaction
> can do.

I have a Satchmo 0.6 store on WebFaction and it works just fine. SSL
should work without any problem since revision 823.

[CarlFK]

On Jan 15, 8:39 pm, "John Shaffer" <jshaffer2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 15, 2008 4:14 PM, CarlFK <cfkars...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I figured the requirements for Satchmo might be beyond what WebFaction
> > can do.
>
> I have a Satchmo 0.6 store on WebFaction and it works just fine. SSL
> should work without any problem since revision 823.

What do you get from WebFaction that you don't get from a VPS?

As far as I can tell, WebFaction won't let me break things.

[kbochert]

I am about to try these VPS's

railsplayground.com
They are used to fastcgi. They provide a free control panel that is
impressive(to me at least) - uses lighttpd by default ( even has a
one-click swap between apache and lighttpd!) Base modules are selected
for light memory footprint, to the point where the installation uses
15MB of memory, and a fast cgi app can be hosted in about 50mb.
(versus ~128k for Cpanel alone)

buyavps.com
Little or no support (I assume) but a VPS with 128k mem goes for $9.95/
mo. They also use the lxadmin panel (lxlabs.com).

Both of these use Centos, which I think is required for lxadmin.

I will probably get an account on both; railsplayground for their
presumably expert support, and buyavps for a cheap place to make
mistakes.


Karl

[CarlFK]

For the record: I went with Slicehost - a VPS.

The rational for the choice is like this: the site is still in the
development phase, and I am guessing it will be easier to debug
things when I am in control of everything, can see everything, etc.

There are a few things that bother me with my VPS, like I needed to do
"apt-get install locals" in order to get postgresql to install. I did
not need to do that on my local test box that should have been
identical gutsy install. I could not get a good answer on exactly how
the VPS was configured. but, these are all OS issues, not apache/sql
issues, which means it is much easier to figure out where a problem
exists: server setup or "site code" (views, templates, directory
rights...)

Another reason I went with the VPS:
"should I get this car?"
"no, you should get this dump truck. the car can't haul a load of
dirt."
do I need to haul a load of dirt?

That pattern repeated itself often, so I started thinking if everyone
else is hauling dirt, maybe I should be prepared to haul dirt too.

personally, I think there is still room for someone to do a real
comparison of the 2+ options, but it takes time I didn't have, and it
may be that there are just too many variables: 100's of provider
choices, 1000's of developers doing 10,000 of things. much of that
can be categorized, but it still may end up being too many variables.

Carl K

[Ian Lawrence]

Hi
i went with webfaction and it is the best decision i ever made (in web terms)
support is great and so are the plans (i have no connection to
webfaction...i am just a satisfied customer)
I cannot recommend them highly enough
Ian

--
always code as if the person who ends up maintaining it will be a
violent psychopath who knows where you live.
http://ianlawrence.info