8 replies to this topic

[McFox]

Hi

I wondered what others views were on domain and website hosting: do you use different webhosting companies for different websites or are all of your eggs in one basket, so to speak? (Not including client companies, of course )

McF

[Jill]

Seems to me having multiple hosting companies would be a royal pain in the ass. Why have multiple hosts when you can do everything from one?

Unless of course you're doing something shady and you don't want the engines to know all those shady sites are somehow related. (Not you McFox, just generally speaking.)

If you just have a bunch of sites, you should be proud that they are all yours and you should have no reason to need multiple hosts.

Jill

[SearchRank]

All our company web sites, SEO, web design and construction portal, are all in one data center.

We host client sites in three different data centers depending on their needs. We have an NT environment at one facility where we host low end stuff, a Unix at another where we host high end stuff (that's where our sites are at) and then some database integrated stuff here in a Phoenix data center.

It is nice to not have eggs in one basket because when one data center or server has a problem, at least it is not affecting each and every client. I would like to have only two locations, not three but the few sites that are hosted here in Phoenix would be a pain to move to another hosting environment so we leave them be.

[Ledfish]

Recently we transitioned several sites to a new host and during the transition, I can honestly say that having multiple sites on multiple hosts was a huge pain in the ass.

Some say that you can get around the supposed interlink penality by have sites on multiple hosts because they will have very different I.P. Address blocks. I suppose that is true, but I can also imagine that managing your sites would then become much more time consuming unless your coding is very basic.

I would add that if your doing multiple sites with a single host, it might be prudent to explain to the host and ask that they not all be put on the same server and in different data centers if possible (this might be hard to do)

[McFox]

It had not occurred to me about the 'shady stuff'. Much too complex

I was thinking along the lines of if a hosting company went out of business. What would happen then, sort of thing?

The reason I ask is because last year (or was it the year before?), I decided it would be prudent to have 2 hosts, for seperate, unrelated, projects. It seemed a good idea at the time but what a complete pain! To date, I have had nothing but hassle with the 'new' host (not managed to publish a single page) whereas, all along, my trusty 'old' host has been stalwart in keeping my sites running.

So, I wondered if having all of my websites hosted by one host was a good or a bad thing, and what others did, or thought?

McF

[dbmasters]

I have all my sites on one server, with the exception of one rogue client that refuses to move...ARGH! and it's great, under reseller packages one login brings me to my domain config options for every domain I operate (except that ONE) and it make everything quick and easy. If you are not a reseller and just have several single user domain accounts I doubt it would make much of a difference.

[discountdomains]

Its no big deal to change your DNS settings, most domain registrars give you a control panel.

Clare

[BobetteKyle]

I was thinking along the lines of if a hosting company went out of business. What would happen then, sort of thing?
<snip>
So, I wondered if having all of my websites hosted by one host was a good or a bad thing, and what others did, or thought?

McF, I have my sites with more than one host for several reasons (None related to SEO):

(1) Like you, I don't like the idea of relying exclusively on one server. If something drastic happens to one server/company, I can move a site in a day or two with minimal stress.

I think it's a valid reason. I know a man who hosts all of his sites from his own server. A utility company came digging around in the dirt one day and accidentally cut his service line. All of his sites were offline and his emails dribbled out onto the ground for two or three days while he got things up and going again. Even then, his service was sporadic for a while as he ironed out the tech problems.

(2) I have six different hosts right now, mostly the fall out from a hosting service research project. These are small $5 - $10 per month plans. I'll be consolidating down to two or three hosts when the prepaids run out.

(3) I keep my largest, most important site with a host that is pricier than some others and charges for some features others include at no cost.

They (Lexiconn.com) have absolutely outstanding customer service and support documentation, however. One time they even put a program in place just because I asked about it! In this case it's a matter of paying more to get better. I plan to keep websitemarketingplan.com there until the end of time.

(4) I can't afford to have all of my other sites at Lexiconn, so I found a great reseller deal at hostforweb.com. I pay a single fee for a block of IPs, space on one of their servers, and my own nameservers. It is a great value.

(5) The third host, myhosting.com - which I should drop for budgetary reasons but will probably keep - has a nifty photo album feature I like. I have a lot of pictures of my daughter (Amarette) singing in them, both when she was five singing karaoke and all grown up singing with a band. So, as a Mom I'll probably continue to splurge the 10 monthly bucks for that one.

Anyway, that's my rationale and the history behind my separate hosting situation.

From the SEO standpoint, the sites on the same server together do not seem to be treated any differently from those hosted elsewhere. The PRs make intuitive sense.

The one exception is a site that has several "affiliate-content-heavy" pages. The inner pages seem to have been docked about four pagerank points (homepage is PR5. Inner pages all PR 1 or 2). This seems to be related to the content, not the server, though.

Regards,
Bobette Kyle

Edited by BobetteKyle, 06 April 2004 - 11:11 AM.

[anthonyparsons.com]

I use independent registars with three main hosts depending on the clients situation. I am currently about to move my business over to iPowerweb for their high bandwidth. I guess that's the problem with most hosts, limited bandwidth with there packages.

What now makes it a little harder to have all eggs in the one basket is that Australia for example, if you own a .au domain, it must be pointed to an Australian based server as per new government regulations. This is the reason I now use 3 hosts, one for Australian clients, one for average global clients that are not restricted and one for high end global requirements.