This seems penny wise and pound foolish. The cost of the remote hosting is
going to be swamped by whatever you are paying somneone to keep an eye on it.
The savings for sharing the host, aren't going to make up for any hassels
involved in sharing the host.
That depends, if they went with a Managed service it would work
well but then again a managed service is going to be at least 200 bucks
a month.
Personally I think that a lot of people look at hosting the wrong way. It
is one thing if you are just hosting some of your kids photos or a personal
website to use as a Soap Box.
If you are running a business you should be using a business class service.
A business class service costs more than 49.00 a month (unless it is
shared).
A business class service would never allow you to have only one hard
drive (and thus no redundancy).
At least if you are doing normal shared hosting at 49.00 bucks a month you
can reasonably expect that you are sitting on some level of RAID, that
backups
are being done, root kit checks etc...
Yes I am biased because we sell such as service but we are not the only
ones out there that do it and we started the service after watching so
many people making such a horrible mistake with their revenue source.
Sincerely,
Josua D. Drake
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
