SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    Trash Boat mkoenig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    LunarPages.com Review

    Removed
    Last edited by mkoenig; Sep 17, 2008 at 11:37.

  2. #2
    Trash Boat mkoenig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    4 hours later and im still down. I called an hour ago, and they said they would have it done within the hour.

  3. #3
    Certified Ethical Hacker silver trophybronze trophy dklynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    14,692
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    mk,

    Care to rewrite your review in light of this experience?

    Regards,

    DK
    David K. Lynn - Data Koncepts is a long-time WebHostingBuzz (US/UK)
    Client and (unpaid) WHB Ambassador
    mod_rewrite Tutorial Article (setup, config, test & write
    mod_rewrite regex w/sample code) and Code Generator

  4. #4
    Trash Boat mkoenig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah i removed it for fear of them shutting me down and not letting me get my files.

    Let me finish moving to the other server then i'll re-post.

  5. #5
    Non-Member Musicbox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    india
    Posts
    1,331
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    lunarpages is not bad they are good in less amount.
    Last edited by Matt Mickiewicz; Feb 13, 2012 at 16:22.

  6. #6
    Trash Boat mkoenig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've been with them for 3 years.

    Let me finish moving sites then ill give the spill.

    They have been harassing me. They need to redo their ticket system. They can't keep up with anything.

  7. #7
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Lunar ppage is good host, i have good experience with them

  8. #8
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The basic plan on lunarpages is pointless,they lure you in with unlimited this and unlimited that,the fact is,if you get any traffic on any site,they disable your scripts and politely ask weather you would like to upgrade to a VPS or dedicated server.

    I started out with 5 sites on there (When i joined you were told you were allowed a maximum of 10,but on the basic plan this isn't possible with the 1% cpu limit) .

    I eventually moved 4 of the sites away from lunarpages (to free hosting and with no problems) as i was fed up with no traffic sites getting shut down for supposed high cpu usage.

    Now i am left with one,which does get traffic,but not enough for me to warrant upgrading.

    I have seen many people who use wordpress,with all the cache sytems installed,who get less than 1000 page impressions a day get their accounts disabled.

    The basic plan is really for people with no traffic,who don't use scripts,because any script that has traffic, even minimum traffic will exceed the 1% cpu limit at least some point during the day,even if its for only a minute.

    Thye are happy for you to stay on the basic plan (and take your cash) if you don't have traffic,there are 250+ sites on the server i am on,if they all used their allowable 1% cpu then the server would crash,but they over subscribe because they know that 99% of those sites won't get any traffic at all,so the server as a whole probably never goes above 50% cpu,which is why they should be flexible with those sites that occasionally do go over the 1% limit at certain times of the day,even if they hit say 5% cpu for short periods ,it shouldn't be an issue.

    Support do answer you usually within 24 hours,but they never respond to what you ask them,they just give you the standard replies of "thanks for this thanks for that,may i suggest "insert VPS or dedicated plan here"

    Rant over.

  9. #9
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,875
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joe de vivre View Post
    The basic plan on lunarpages is pointless,they lure you in with unlimited this and unlimited that,the fact is,if you get any traffic on any site,they disable your scripts and politely ask weather you would like to upgrade to a VPS or dedicated server.
    There are literally billions of sites on the web running quite happily within that plan's limits either there or on one of the equivalent shared hosting plans elsewhere.

    If you want significant CPU then you need to have a very small number (or perhaps no) other sites on the same server since the cpu can only be spread so far. CPU is basically what you pay for with hosting plans these days - the more CPU you need the more you need to pay.

    Popular scripts such as WordPress with an appropriate caching plugin installed can get rather large numbers of visitors and still be within the CPU limits of shared hosting plans. It is only those getting really huge numbers of visitors and those who don't optimise their scripts properly that have CPU issues.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  10. #10
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    Popular scripts such as WordPress with an appropriate caching plugin installed can get rather large numbers of visitors and still be within the CPU limits of shared hosting plans. It is only those getting really huge numbers of visitors and those who don't optimise their scripts properly that have CPU issues.
    I had a wordpress script installed,with wp-supercache,and it never got more than 1000 page impressions a day,yet it was disabled for using too much cpu,and i know of many similar stories of people using wordpress on lunarpages with similar hits who had their scripts disabled,and the very poilte "upgrade" email.

    Either wordpress uses too much cpu for the shared server,which if thats the case they should black list it for basic planners,or it doesn't and they just make it all up and try and force people with traffic onto VPS or dedicated.

    The fact is there is just no way of knowing as we can't check our own cpu usage.

  11. #11
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,875
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joe de vivre View Post
    I had a wordpress script installed,with wp-supercache,and it never got more than 1000 page impressions a day,yet it was disabled for using too much cpu,and i know of many similar stories of people using wordpress on lunarpages with similar hits who had their scripts disabled,and the very poilte "upgrade" email.
    It can also depend on what other plugins you are using. WordPress itself uses very little CPU when used with a cache plugin that is properly configured. Of course it also depends on the spread of your visitors throughout the day. If all 1000 impressions are within a short period then that could exceed limits.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  12. #12
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    It can also depend on what other plugins you are using. WordPress itself uses very little CPU when used with a cache plugin that is properly configured. Of course it also depends on the spread of your visitors throughout the day. If all 1000 impressions are within a short period then that could exceed limits.
    As it was my second wordpress script to be disabled (This was the domain i was given when i signed up,now its just a blank page not being used.) I was careful not to have any plugins other than an adsense one and wp-supercache.

    As for traffic being spread,theres no way of controlling the spread of traffic,but if say for instance 10&#37; of the 1000 page impressions came in a 5 minute period,would that be enough to take it over the 1% limit? also shouldn't small increases in cpu above 1% be allowed,as its only a short temporary increase given that the total over a day is only 1000?

    I am not a c-panel expert but is there any reason why the individual customer can't see his/her own cpu usage,is this a lunarpages thing or is it a c-panel thing?

    I do occasionally check server status in my c-panel (This is for the whole server,serving 200+ sites) and the memory and cpu usage is always quite low.

    So there is room for flexibility.

  13. #13
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,875
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joe de vivre View Post
    As for traffic being spread,theres no way of controlling the spread of traffic,but if say for instance 10% of the 1000 page impressions came in a 5 minute period,would that be enough to take it over the 1% limit? also shouldn't small increases in cpu above 1% be allowed,as its only a short temporary increase given that the total over a day is only 1000?

    I am not a c-panel expert but is there any reason why the individual customer can't see his/her own cpu usage,is this a lunarpages thing or is it a c-panel thing?

    I do occasionally check server status in my c-panel (This is for the whole server,serving 200+ sites) and the memory and cpu usage is always quite low.

    So there is room for flexibility.
    The normal CPU usage options that you have access to are for the entire server not just your account. The available CPU needs to be shared between all the accounts on the server so if there are 200 accounts on the server then you can expect that the maximum CPU that you would be allowed to use will not be above 1% of the entire CPU which depending on the actual CPU power of the server may not be much at all. Other shared hosts impose similar CPU limits since the CPU needs to be available for all the accounts on the server to use and even allowing for most sites not needing all their allowance they can't let any account claim too much more than their fair share at any time.

    The way to overcome these limits is to move to a server where there are fewer accounts. This generally costs more since the server costs the same regardless of how many accounts it hosts.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  14. #14
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    The normal CPU usage options that you have access to are for the entire server not just your account. The available CPU needs to be shared between all the accounts on the server so if there are 200 accounts on the server then you can expect that the maximum CPU that you would be allowed to use will not be above 1&#37; of the entire CPU which depending on the actual CPU power of the server may not be much at all. Other shared hosts impose similar CPU limits since the CPU needs to be available for all the accounts on the server to use and even allowing for most sites not needing all their allowance they can't let any account claim too much more than their fair share at any time.

    The way to overcome these limits is to move to a server where there are fewer accounts. This generally costs more since the server costs the same regardless of how many accounts it hosts.
    But if all the 200+ sites used up their allowed 1% wouldn't that bring down the server? Surely by allowing more than 100 sites on the server,they are over selling it.

    Or alternatively you could argue that from experience this never happens,so they put that amount of sites on a server in the knowledge that there is a certain flexibility between the sites that get traffic and those that don't so it kind of evens out,but this flexibility only seems to work one way.

    If a wordpress script that only gets 1000 page impressions a day (Which works out at 41 page impressions an hour,lets assume it was spread out over the day) can't run on a shared server then what's the point in offering people unlimited this and unlimited that,theres no mention of limited CPU when you sign up,theres no big BUT......

    Or maybe they just make all this up and target sites that get traffic with scare tactics "urging" them to upgrade.
    celebrity pix

    Add celebrity-pix.co.uk
    Myspace - Facebook - Twitter

  15. #15
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,875
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joe de vivre View Post
    But if all the 200+ sites used up their allowed 1&#37; wouldn't that bring down the server? Surely by allowing more than 100 sites on the server,they are over selling it.
    I didn't say that they allow that much just that that much would be the most you could expect to ever be able to be allocated given that most sites don't come remotely close to needing their CPU allowance.

    Quote Originally Posted by joe de vivre View Post
    Or alternatively you could argue that from experience this never happens,so they put that amount of sites on a server in the knowledge that there is a certain flexibility between the sites that get traffic and those that don't so it kind of evens out,but this flexibility only seems to work one way.
    The CPU limit could be somewhat higher than the total CPU divided evenly between all accounts simply because most accounts on shared hosting are either using it for manly static pages or have only a few dozen visitors each day.

    Quote Originally Posted by joe de vivre View Post
    If a wordpress script that only gets 1000 page impressions a day (Which works out at 41 page impressions an hour,lets assume it was spread out over the day) can't run on a shared server then what's the point in offering people unlimited this and unlimited that,theres no mention of limited CPU when you sign up,theres no big BUT......

    Or maybe they just make all this up and target sites that get traffic with scare tactics "urging" them to upgrade.
    Generrally no hosting provider advertises the limitations of their hosting in their ads but instead puts it in the terms of service that you agree to when you sign up. If people actually read the ToS rather than just clicking on agree then there would be fewer signing up for the wrong sort of hosting.

    There are a lot of hosting providers who put a lot more accounts on one server than LunarPages does. BlueHost (where I have my sites) puts about 450 accounts on each server (I get several thousand visitors to my site each day but most of it is static pages so I haven't had any issues with any of the WordPress blogs or other scripts exceeding CPU limits). From what I have heard GoDaddy puts as much as 1000 accounts on each server. Of course you also need to take into account the CPU power of the servers when comparing them as well since if a server has 4 times as much CPU power and only twice as many accounts then each gets twice as much CPU.

    BlueHost actually have an automated script that temporarily disables any account that exceeds their CPU limit so that their staff don't have to contact people to ask them to upgrade (which isn't possible at BlueHost in any case since they only offer basic shared hosting that is approximately equivalent to LunarPages shared hosting plan.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  16. #16
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy ldcdc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Ploiesti
    Posts
    4,474
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    But if all the 200+ sites used up their allowed 1&#37; wouldn't that bring down the server? Surely by allowing more than 100 sites on the server,they are over selling it.
    That is the nature of shared hosting. The 1% is not yours and only yours, but you're allowed to use it when resources are available. At $5 per month, you cannot expect 1% of a decently configured server. If you want guaranteed resources, you must go for VPS/dedicated.

    If a wordpress script that only gets 1000 page impressions a day (Which works out at 41 page impressions an hour,lets assume it was spread out over the day) can't run on a shared server then what's the point in offering people unlimited this and unlimited that,theres no mention of limited CPU when you sign up,theres no big BUT......
    More often than not, the reason why low traffic sites end up being suspended is a plugin/addon that's very inefficient. With blogs, another common reason is no cache system, coupled with lots of posts per page.

    Fact is, it would be bad business for a host, any host, to suspend/terminate an account, unless there's real reason behind it. At $5/month account, 1000 page views per day isn't much, so they could profitably host it -- unless something weird is happening with the scrips run from it.

    Or maybe they just make all this up and target sites that get traffic with scare tactics "urging" them to upgrade.
    This would really work if they would be targeting businesses and high-end customers, with the budget to upgrade. But fact is, LP is a low priced host, putting its message and attracting the budget conscientious people.
    HostPeek.com - budget hosts, compared
    CouponsNexus.com - web hosting coupons

    Ultra Cheap Hosts | Web Hosting Reviews Forums

  17. #17
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    The CPU limit could be somewhat higher than the total CPU divided evenly between all accounts simply because most accounts on shared hosting are either using it for manly static pages or have only a few dozen visitors each day.
    Most accounts on basic plans are usually people new to building websites,and i would venture a guess that they are lured in by the easiness of setting up a forum or blog with a one click fantastico,where no website or code knowledge is required. So i would say, most would be using scripts.

    Website novices like the idea of having their own blog,having their own forum,they wouldn't even know where to start with static pages.





    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    Generrally no hosting provider advertises the limitations of their hosting in their ads but instead puts it in the terms of service that you agree to when you sign up. If people actually read the ToS rather than just clicking on agree then there would be fewer signing up for the wrong sort of hosting.
    I agree,there is a lot of competition in web hosting,so only a fool would advertise the negatives while their competitors advertise the positives.

    I have looked on the lunarpages website,and all i see is "unlimited,unlimited ONLY $4.95 a month"

    Of course there will be TOS,they have to do that for legal requirements,but once you have got past the point of filling in your bank details,who actually reads the TOS?

    (I have just spent five minutes looking at their website and finally found the TOS,theres nothing about CPU limits on there that i could see,if its on the site at all,its in very fine small print)

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    There are a lot of hosting providers who put a lot more accounts on one server than LunarPages does. BlueHost (where I have my sites) puts about 450 accounts on each server (I get several thousand visitors to my site each day but most of it is static pages so I haven't had any issues with any of the WordPress blogs or other scripts exceeding CPU limits). From what I have heard GoDaddy puts as much as 1000 accounts on each server. Of course you also need to take into account the CPU power of the servers when comparing them as well since if a server has 4 times as much CPU power and only twice as many accounts then each gets twice as much CPU.

    BlueHost actually have an automated script that temporarily disables any account that exceeds their CPU limit so that their staff don't have to contact people to ask them to upgrade (which isn't possible at BlueHost in any case since they only offer basic shared hosting that is approximately equivalent to LunarPages shared hosting plan.


    Maybe lunarpages isn't that unusual,maybe all hosts are like them,maybe they all try to sell you the upgrade package as soon as you get over a certain number of visits a day,on a server with 200+ sites, where no site gets traffic but yours,you are sure going to stand out.
    celebrity pix

    Add celebrity-pix.co.uk
    Myspace - Facebook - Twitter

  18. #18
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ldcdc View Post
    This would really work if they would be targeting businesses and high-end customers, with the budget to upgrade. But fact is, LP is a low priced host, putting its message and attracting the budget conscientious people.
    I got a message from support the the other day saying what page of mine was causing too much CPU usage,only the page they mentioned was a page they disabled a week earlier.

    There is a big monetary difference for them if they could convert lets say 10% of basic planners into VPS or dedicated. (Weather they need to be on there or not) So there is something in it for them. They are not a charity,they are a business,its about maximising profits after all,so if they can push,coax,coerce a enough basic planners on to the higher grade plan,then the difference between $5 a month and $100 dollars a month is quite a lot.
    celebrity pix

    Add celebrity-pix.co.uk
    Myspace - Facebook - Twitter

  19. #19
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just forget LunarPages, they sux a lot. Go for liquidweb, 100x better than LunarPages. This webhosting company (lunarpages) is ridiculous. They still charged me for shared hosting plan despite i've moved my website to a VPS plan

  20. #20
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    35
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well lunarpages.com have worked great for me, great customer services and no mistake till now if something happens will post but for now they are great

  21. #21
    SitePoint Addict Poiesis01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    233
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've also been using lunarpages for a while. They no longer allow formmail (I've got windows hosting for asp.net sites) and recently moved servers to a new location; my sites were down for 2 days when they moved the server but other than that they've been great.

  22. #22
    SitePoint Addict Poiesis01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    233
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by productivedreams View Post
    I agree, they need to improve!
    Who are you agreeing with? And do you mind elaborating on what should they improve?

  23. #23
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    oh sorry for that, I mean, Lunar Pages...their customer support needs to improve


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •