Worried about location of servers?

**James Trotta** · 02-23-2005, 06:59 AM

I wonder how many people consider location of servers when choosing a web host. For example would you rather have a host with a datacenter in vancouver than servers in LA?

fishfreek · 02-23-2005, 07:15 AM

Some people get a sense of security having a server closer to them than further away. I dont quite understand it myself since its notlike you can acutally visit the server or anything since most datacenters are locked down with very heavy security.

For those who want a server for web hosting response tie is not that big of a deal but for gammers I can see where they would prefer one closer vs further away.

**James Trotta** · 02-23-2005, 08:03 AM

I was thinking there might be security issues as well. For example LA would be a greater risk than vancouver in terms of earthquakes, terrorist attacks, maybe even power outages like we had right before Arnold took over. Do people worry about this stuff?

Jonathan VanSchaack · 02-23-2005, 09:09 AM

Yes we worry about this, only this I would visit the datacenters webpage. Most datacenters and/or server providers will address issues such as those listed above.

Menzrea · 03-07-2005, 07:46 AM

closer better if something go wrong i think you just go there and give it to them!

pinkfluffybunny · 03-21-2005, 05:41 PM

Most government agencies and emergency management systems require redundant server on both coasts, mirrowed drives and emgency power in their contracts.

MidHost Staff · 03-22-2005, 10:37 AM

i'll just stick with what most big company uses, like google. I believe if it do die, everyone else would understand.

DOS · 03-22-2005, 01:41 PM

It's nice to know, but what are the odds of something happening to the servers in terms of a natural disaster.

monster · 03-22-2005, 08:38 PM

I prefer a central location so you can have a good ping from the east and west coast. So texas is an ideal location

MadHatter · 03-23-2005, 10:03 AM

I live in the Uk, so having my servers in NY helps me alot, it gives me a decent ping even from sunny Britain, and most people in the US, my customers especially, are happy with the speed. I also do a full backup of all the servers to a set of UK servers & Texas Servers each week just incase of absolute disaster.
It's expensive, but the customers like that peace of mind

zcoder · 04-10-2005, 10:09 AM

So If one was located in NY I should worry about another 9/11?
common your joking? when I update my site I have the same copy on my
computer, if the worse did happen, I can be up and running on another
server in just 24-48 hours. Infact where I got my domain name they offer
free the ability to host one simple page, where I can tell them the problem
and that the site should be up again soon ect.

The worst thing that would spoil all this is this would have to happen:
My hosting server in NY got destryed, my copy on my computer of the whole site
got deleted, and my registar was bomed too.

the above is not going to happen, if you think it would or could you got a bad outlook
on life. lol

Zcoder....

Tekime · 04-11-2005, 02:01 AM

Location is fairly important in some cases. My business server has been in Chicago for the past year, but I just moved it to a dedicated in Texas. Inside the US, the data center is probably more important than the physical location. However we do have clients who need international access so we are continually looking for ways to make it faster.

One location can never guarantee total reliability, so the solution for us is to (eventually) have servers all over the place.