VB 3.7.2 PL2 Mods, Add-ons and hacks compatibility?

Brian, what your basically suggesting then is that despite using "shared hosting" you feel its perfectly acceptable to install any script you like, regardless of how badly it is written, or if it makes servers go nuts right from the get-go.

Shared hosting is exactly that, its shared, so no customers have the right to monopolise an entire server, and the script that we ban, are ones that have been found to monopolise an entire server, either from the very minute they start running, such as the sitemap generator, or the SSH scripts that provide SSH access directly in the form of a publicly viewable web page.

VBulletin is different, it doesnt present an SSH command line to the public, its all done behind the scenes.

We also dont work on exact numbers of CPU usage/RAM usage, we work on a "common sense" approach and expect the same respect in return from our customers.

If they have a script, or their web site in general starts consuming more resources than it should for its level of traffic, we will talk to you about it BEFORE it becomes a problem, not afterwards.

If something becomes a problem overnight, where no warning signs are available, we will simply shift a customer to an empty server so they can continue to function while rectifying the problems with their website, thus not upsetting shared customers, and not upsetting the problematic customer by shutting them down if possible.

Sometimes however, its not always possible move a web site quick enough if it has already driven server loads through the roof, so a short term suspension should never be ruled out (10 minutes roughly) just to allow a server to get its breath back, then move the web site immediately, but all we want to do at the end of the day is keep people going, nobody like or wants a suspended account which is why we TALK to people.

We call them, we email them the details, we suggest people who can help if need be, but its all common sense based.

Dont take the p*** and we will always have your back kinda thing, thats how we operate. We dont put specific usage figures down because every server is different, some servers have lots of lightweight web sites on them, and so a few biggies really dont have any effect, and some servers have several biggies on them all sharing equally without causing any bother for each other, we balance things out based on typical usage, but we would NEVER just shut down an account without first contacting a customer to find out whats going on, and keeping in touch to rectify soomething if there is a problem, so please dont even begin to compare us with hostgator.

We run several VBSEO enabled web sites, and they run like a charm I'm happy to report, so we know exactly what will happen if Simon use's it.... Nothing.....

Webforumz.com run it too, and it doesnt really make any dent in resources on a 7000 member forum as its clearly well written, but if it was poorly written, and hit monopolising server loads, or created endless MySQL query loops, would you want to be with a host who didnt care as long as your within your bandwidth limits, or would you want to be with a host who knew about things like that and takes positive action to prevent these kind of things even occurring in the first place?

Imagine it from a neigbour point of view too, like you say, there are tons of hosting companies that will let your neighbours install anything they like, but they will slam you the minute you hit 2% usage, or worse, they wont even care as long as your within your limits.

You wanna be neighbours with people like that?

Anyway, I apologise for my lengthy rants, but sometimes a small seed of negativity can demand an awful lot of weed killer to reset the balance. While your not specifically attacking us, your implying things that can lead others to think nothing good.

I think the issue here is not so much *policy* as it is communication, support, and process.

It certainly makes sense to me that a host can and *should* have a policy to prevent users from consuming too much resources on a shared hosting environment. Doing otherwise, would cause all other customers to suffer as a result of a single rogue, or simply a newbie user unfamiliar with the technical aspects of script performance, etc.

Brian hit in right on by pointing out that hosts typically promote huge bandwidth and file storage quotas, but lack information about CPU usage limitations. I would add that this is primarily done as a marketing technique in knowing full well that these resources will *sound* great to the potential customer and will *never* be used except for a tiny fraction.

The problem is that CPU usage limitations are not as easy to quantify, and it cannot be arbitrarily inflated as a marketing scheme. However, it should be communicated. When it is stated, I'm sure that it gets stuck into the fine print that nobody spends much time reading for a $20 hosting account.

Support and process are even more important.

HostGator seems to get a bad reputation in particular for site shutdowns because they *apparently* do not notify a webmaster in advance, and then take a long time to respond to follow-up requests.

Let's get this straight. If you absolutely have to do an emergency shutdown on someone's website, then you absolutely should be making those customers maximum priority in your support process. They need to be able to find out what is happening, and how to correct the issues. Let's face it. The target demographic for a cheap shared hosting account is far more likely to be an inexperienced newbie user, and targeting these users brings with it the responsibility of the host to support them and to not to allow their sites to suffer as a result of unnecessary downtime that they cannot easily troubleshoot.

But what about process?

If CPU usage is such a big deal for hosts that are overloading their machines like HostGator, then shouldn't they also build a process that helps identify problematic accounts prior to the catastrophic shutdown. When I say catastrophic, there is two fold meaning here:

a) The customer's site is shut-down and inaccessible for x hours/days
b) HostGator loses a customer's residual income stream and gets a bad report posted online, possibly preventing them from achieving as many new customers as could be had otherwise.

I am not picking on HostGator. We seem to get more customer complaints about them than the other popular hosts, but they are by no means alone.

As one of the more widely used hosting providers for our customer base, I would invite a company representative to provide their input on this topic here.

So what could that process be?

Monitoring of growing CPU usage, with automated emails informing the user of their growing needs, outlining the steps when they exceed available resources, and upselling them to a more adequate account.

Monitoring installed software to compare with a list of scripts known to consume high or excessive server resources, and automatically notifying them that it could cause an issue, along with suggestions on how to minimize the impact, or upsell them to a more adequate account.

Others?

You see that the suggested processes so far are largely automated making them extremely cost effective, especially when you consider that they help prevent the loss of existing customers, boost the potential for new customers, and increase earnings from existing customers through upsell... not to forget actually delivering a high quality service to *the customers*!

So if there are so many benefits for the host, why do we continue to have so many negative reports?

By the way Richard, I really appreciate your post. It sounds like you are being proactive about these types of issues. That is refreshing to hear.

I saw your request to moderator Brian's post. I am not going to do so, but for a specific reason. I do not think Brian was specifically targeting your company. Likewise, in a larger content of quality of service, I think his comment is exactly right.

Specifically, the market dynamics are such that so many hosting providers are available, that consumers really do have so many choices out there, that they should consider choosing a new provider whenever they do not get the quality of service the expected.

While you are being proactive about your business; others are not doing so well in this regard. Therefore, the competition model is very effective. In fact, you secured your customer by providing feedback here clarifying that our sitemap is acceptable.

For instance, we do encounter hosts that have disabled mod_rewrite. This effectively makes their customers unable to use vBSEO. Since vBSEO is one of the critical success factors for a site, our recommendation will always be to get a new host. Of course this is in our best interest as a company since we make a sale, but it's also in the best interest of our customers who get to take advantage of vBSEO to help deliver the traffic that is absolutely necessary for their site's to take off.

So for our customers, whenever you do not get the quality of support you expect, or find an instance where your site is shutdown for a long period without fast support or upfront communication, my recommendation is for you to choose a new host asap, and also to report your experience online to prevent others in similar circumstances from running into the same type of trouble.