Helm - Yes or No?

Had a quick review of Helm. I'll take your word for it that it has more features than we currently have, but I think they must be buried in the interface somewhere, as on the surface I didn't see all kinds of new features. On the other hand, what we currently have seems like a lot to me, but I'm definately not a power user at this point.

Am I correct in assuming with Helm we would be using the Reseller interface?

I kind of like the idea of being able to determine the size of my database(s) as required, rather than having a fixed quota. I'm not sure how that will affect me personally in the long run as I've only recently started using SQL Server, so I don't know how to calculate what my future requirements might be. 50 MBs sounds like a lot, but I don't know how that compares to having a 50 MB Access database which I am more familiar with (as far as how much data that would contain).

I did like Urchin a lot. Much more useful information than we currently get with Webalizer. I don't currently like how webalizer has no security, so anyone can view information I don't necessarily want generally available.
 
We are also considering getting a better Mail Server. Would include IMAP support, alternate SMTP port and a very good webmail interface. Another advantage of it would be that YOU (yourself) could enable/disable various SPAM protection options - SpamCOP, MX Record Verification, Reverse DNS, etc. We're looking at virus checking software as well.

These sort of things are not possible with HSphere because 3rd party software it supports are limited.

Still, I believe many people like the Summary Disk Usage system. That would be the biggest trade-off if we switch platforms. I'd like to hear more opinions on this
 
Switching to HELM doesn't provide me with any extra features, so I don't care. However, I want to know if we're going to LOSE any others features other than SDU by switching to HELM.
 
Currently we are using SDU so when we need more space we just buy bigger packages or pay for more space. I don't think there is a huge downside to fixed space provided the pricing for extra is reasonable.

I have to say that not having to worry about 3 different storage places (DB, email, web) makes it much more convenient.

How would this affect email space? I guess everything will go back to fixed. Just be generous I guess (at least for your current customers maybe :)
 
Bliss said:
Switching to HELM doesn't provide me with any extra features, so I don't care. However, I want to know if we're going to LOSE any others features other than SDU by switching to HELM.
Click to expand...

What do we lose???

1) Webshere 4 supports file and folder permissions..Helm doesn't (we are running websphere 3)
2) can't find anything about SSI management
3) the OSEcommerce application would have to manually added to our websites (big deal - we can download it ourselves anyway)
4)we lose the sqlserverenterprise website manager :( but again...we can install it on our sites ourselves
5)

What do we gain
1) ftp sub accounts on windows YEAH!!
2) better webmail YEAH!!
3) better stats YEAH!! throught awstats or urchin
4) wysiwyg editor in the file manager (no big deal but nice touch)
5) DNS Zone record editing...not for everyone but I like anything that gives me full control
6) Summary disk usage

I can't think of anything else...maybe we can continue to add to this list and then take a poll???
 
Not entirely true... for example, W2K3/IIS6 does not natively support CDONTS for mail, but you can register the DLL yourself, although it's not suggested. There are some other things too. Mostly, however, it's a configuration issue, since W2K3/IIS6 is so very locked down right out of the box. If you like, I can email you the list of installation procedures we use to build a web server using W2K3/IIS6 for ASP and ASP.NET support. If even just one step helps you out with a silly registry entry or something, it's worth it. :)
I think this is outside the scope of this forum, so just email me private and I'll write back with all my tech notes on it if you like.
-Dave

Yash said:
I understand this is going to be a little difficult from our side but I'm expecting that customers won't have to make any changes to their scripts for them to execute other IIS6, is that correct?
Click to expand...
 
Happy Dave is here :)

I wonder how many people are using CDONTS....I prefer JMail because it's supposed to be better (but never paid much attention to it since I haven't needed to send mail from a high traffic site yet.

I think it's great that MS is locking things down out of the box. I think they made it too easy to connect machines to the internet which is probably 80% of the security problems they get blamed for...not trying to defend MS but I think that if most of the unneeded services were not enabled out of the box (like the messenger service - not msn messenger) then there would be less problems with windows...but that is just my 2 cents.

Yash, is it possible to have a helm server running alongside the hsphere for maybe a couple weeks or a month to work through the issues? I would be willing to move my domains over (provided my email reliability isn't compromised.) But my domains don't get too much traffic so I don't mind if there are issues or downtime for that....if it could help out...I would be willing.

I have asp applications that we can run and see how things work out.

Let me know.
 
Yash said:
There is one issue with Helm however. No summary Disk Usage. That means we'd have to switch back to the fixed quota system for ms sql databases. So the Value package would come with a single 50MB database, silver with two 50MB databases and so on. There wouldn't be that flexibiliy where you can specify database size.
Click to expand...

I've personally never been on a host that did not specify a database size. Then again, even in working with extreme B2B applications for Fortune 50 companies I've never had a single MS SQL database run more than about 25 Mb... and that was after a site that provided a very unoptomized customer-centric multi catalog, collected something in the range of 5,000-10,000 individual orders per *day* had been running for more than 5 years.

There is a disadvantage to defining the size of the databases... you run into the complaint that may come from some that they don't use databases and why should they be penalized by a service they don't use.

I still think it's worth the trade-offs for the features gained. I'd love to be able to create my own CF DSN's and select the SPAM filtering used by the mail server!

Regards,
Hatton
 
hatton said:
There is a disadvantage to defining the size of the databases... you run into the complaint that may come from some that they don't use databases and why should they be penalized by a service they don't use.
Click to expand...

I don't see people being penalized when the databases are part of the packages. Jodohost offers good pricing for their plans and one of the advantages is that you don't need to pay over $15 just to get a MS SQL database like the majority of hosts out there. The packages are based on storage space more than features (although you do get more of each thing with each bigger package)
 
We decided to stick with Windows 2000 for now because our administrators have the most experience with that. CFMX DSNs are not supported on Helm either currently but they have promised to introduce this one very soon. Till then, we'd have to do continue CF DSN creation the old way.
 
Yash said:
We decided to stick with Windows 2000 for now because our administrators have the most experience with that.
Click to expand...

Does Helm "require" Win 2003 Server? Does this mean we're not getting Helm?
 
There are two things we can do to replace the current MS SQL databace system:

1) All packages come with one database. The size of the database would incrememt on each level. You would have to purchase an extra database if you require one

2) Databases are of one set size for all packages. The number of databases provided however increment with each level. You'd have to purchase extra space per DB if you need more.

Let me know which system you'd like the best if we do decide to switch (which looks all the more probable). We'll probably give a 50MB MS SQL database in the Value package. In option 2, the number of 50MB databases would increase at each level. In option 1, the size of 50MB database would increment by 50MB at each level.

If we switch to Helm, existing customers benefiting from SDU won't be hit immediately. We'll provide some sort of period where you won't be charged for extra database or sql space usage
 
Yash said:
There are two things we can do to replace the current MS SQL databace system:
Click to expand...
Hmmm, sorry to hear the current setup is going to change. I like the idea of getting 200mb with the value package and using it any way I like. A bunch of files and small SQL DB or a few files and a large SQL DB.

I think I'll be OK with a 50mb SQL DB though. :)
 
Yash said:
We decided to stick with Windows 2000 for now because our administrators have the most experience with that. CFMX DSNs are not supported on Helm either currently but they have promised to introduce this one very soon. Till then, we'd have to do continue CF DSN creation the old way.
Click to expand...

In that case would you be against a user-built tool to handle the burden for Access DSN's? Unless you're restricting certian tags it shouldn't be much of a problem.

Hatton
 
Yash said:
There are two things we can do to replace the current MS SQL databace system:

2) Databases are of one set size for all packages. The number of databases provided however increment with each level. You'd have to purchase extra space per DB if you need more.
Click to expand...

This one gets my vote since the reason I selected JodoHost was to seperate my databases with each domain. Sure you can use one BIG database for all your domains, but typically that lends to a lot of confusion.

So I would rather see a number of fixed-size databases rather than one honking-big one myself.

Hatton
 
hatton said:
In that case would you be against a user-built tool to handle the burden for Access DSN's? Unless you're restricting certian tags it shouldn't be much of a problem.

Hatton
Click to expand...

what tool are you suggesting?
 
I would opt for one large database rather than many smaller 50mb databases. If someone needs 100mb of table storage, he couldn't keep it in one database with this plan, right? That would stink. You really don't want many db connections at once just to access your data tables. Think of the joins involved! ;)
-Dave
 
WineIsGood said:
I would opt for one large database rather than many smaller 50mb databases. If someone needs 100mb of table storage, he couldn't keep it in one database with this plan, right? That would stink. You really don't want many db connections at once just to access your data tables. Think of the joins involved! ;)
-Dave
Click to expand...

I think what Yash was saying is that a user could opt to extend the size of their database for a charge. I don't see someone hitting that size limit in the first place but if they do then they should be able to purchse more space for that database.

Also, you do realize the amount of space you're talking about, don't you? 50 Mb is a lot of records, even in a poorly arranged database. To give an example, I once had an application running on SQL Server that included a local copy of an area's Yellow Pages. We're talking about records from a 4 county area. Even with all of those records along with paid advertisers, categoirzation data, site statistics tracking, classifieds and real estate the database was only 3 Mb or so!

Yash - If my first paragraph is incorrect (that users could purchase additional space on an existing database -OR- purchase an additional database), please let me know.
 
Actually, we are thinking to allow customers to choose whether they'd need bigger databases or more databases (i.e. have 2 versions of the same package)

And we've not completely ruled out Windows 2003. We are exploring this option currently
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top