[Cialug] New hosting solution

Wed Jan 20 15:29:10 CST 2010

I have an account at hostmonster.com and I had Gallery2 installed on it. 
the Gallery had tons of pictures, over 3GB but number of visitors are in 
tens a day. The Gallery was accessible for Family, cousins and some 
friends. I think it would be ok with your policy.

Though, to add new images I used the Gallery2 feature: FTP images on the 
server in temp directory. Then G2 will take them and make an album. 
Usually between 50 and 150 images will be processed. Almost every time 
after I run the G2 it will block my account for 5-10 minutes because I 
used more process then I'm allowed. But, when I talked to tech support 
they said if it's ok with me - it's ok with them too to block me. It was 
ok with me: better that way then upload image by image. :-)

If I "harass" the processor 2-3 times a month because of G2 - would you 
close mu account?

Afan

Matt Breitbach wrote:
> From Dreamhost : 
>
> 7.Servers are shared with other customers, and as such IRC-related
> activities or severely CPU intensive CGI scripts (e.g. chat scripts, scripts
> which have bugs causing them to not close properly after being run, etc.)
> are not encouraged. Any application that listens for inbound network
> connections (even if the application would otherwise be allowed) are not
> permitted. BitTorrent clients, proxy servers/scripts, IRC bots and bouncers
> (BNC) specifically may not be run on any DreamHost Web Hosting server. If
> your processes are adversely affecting server performance disproportionately
> DreamHost Web Hosting reserves the right to negotiate additional charges
> with the Customer and/or the discontinuation of the offending processes.
>
> From GoDaddy : 
>
> You agree Go Daddy reserves the right to remove Your web site temporarily or
> permanently from its servers if Go Daddy is the recipient of activities that
> threaten the stability of its network.
>
> From 1&1 : 
>
> 7.16.
> You shall at all times use Web Site Space exclusively as a conventional Web
> Site. You shall not use the Web Site Space or Your Services in any way which
> may result in an excessive load on the 1&1 Equipment, including but not
> limited to installing or running web proxies, using your allotted space as
> online backup or storage, or mirroring mass downloads. Use of Web Site Space
> and Your Services shall be in a manner consistent with this Agreement and
> shall not in any way impair the functioning or operation of 1&1's Equipment
> or network. Should your use of the 1&1 Services result in an overly high
> load on the 1&1 Equipment, in 1&1's sole discretion, 1&1 may suspend your
> account until the cause of any such overload is determined and resolved.
>
> 14.4.
> You further agree that in the event that 1&1 believes, in its sole
> discretion, that you have breached any provision(s) of Section 7 of this
> Agreement, or any of its subparts, by storing or allowing material such as
> that described in the aforementioned Section 7, or any of its subparagraphs,
> to be transmitted by 1&1's Equipment, that 1&1 may without any liability to
> you, and in addition to any other remedies, erase or purge such materials
> from 1&1's Equipment without prior notice to you.
>
>
>
> I'd say that most, if not all hosting companies have some verbiage in their
> TOS that allows them to disable and delete an account if it is abusing the
> servers.  For a buck a month, I'm certainly going to shut down a blog that
> has 10,000 readers and consistently puts a .3 load on a shared server.  Most
> websites don't do that though.  The verbiage is there simply to let people
> know that they shouldn't try to host kcci.com on a 1 dollar a month plan, or
> try to use their site as an FTP dump.  I don't expect that I will
> immediately delete any site that accidentally spikes the CPU due to
> unexpected load, but I do want to have verbiage that lets me delete
> iamagooglehacker.com from my server immediately when they try port scanning
> all of googles servers from my datacenter.
>
> -Matt
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cialug-bounces at cialug.org [mailto:cialug-bounces at cialug.org] On Behalf
> Of Todd Walton
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 3:02 PM
> To: Central Iowa Linux Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Cialug] New hosting solution
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Matt Breitbach
> <matthewb at flash.shanje.com> wrote:
>   
>> The policy of monopolizing CPU/Bandwidth/Memory is pretty standard across
>> all hosting platforms.  If you look at anyone's TOS, it usually says
>> something very similar.  We just decided not to bury it.
>>     
>
> Including the deleting part?  I always thought standard procedure was
> to throttle resource usage before it gets out of hand, not to ask
> users to do it and then take drastic action when they mess up.
>
> --
> Todd
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug at cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug at cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://cialug.org/pipermail/cialug/attachments/20100120/44628c9e/attachment-0001.htm 