Hi we all know none of the shared hosting providers let clients use unlimited bandwidth or disk space. so I was just wondering what is the limit of hostgator and other top webhosting providers limit ? please share your opinion.
bluehost has a limit of 50,000 files (no limit on the size of the files or transfer). After that not all the files are no longer backed up, after about 60,000 files or so you receive a warning saying you have X amount of days to get back below the 50,000 limit or you account will be suspended.
Might be inodes, files, CPU usage, RAM usage, even an actual disk space or bandwidth figure. I've actually seen "unlimited" hosts send clients letters that they have exceeded XX GB of bandwidth for the month, and have been suspended!!
Only if you planned to be the oldest living creature the world has ever known. It would take you millenia to upload that much (around 13,180 years at 2mpbs upload speeds), or about 263 years at 100mbps for 24 hours every day - but you'd be exceeding your network contention allowance all that time, your ISP would have shut your account down for X days of the month of transfer over-usage or "fair use" objections, and the fact is you'd never manage to do it. So they could say "Yes, we'll allow that" and you'd never be able to prove they wouldn't.
yes, I wouldn't be able to do that. unless my site based on user uploaded content. or I hire few people to do that.
Some hosts limit base on inodes, others on CPU, but most limit base on CPU. If your site starts using a lot of CPU the site is immediately kicked off.
unlimited is defined as needed and not infinity. Plus no company needs more than 1T to host their own site unless its as big as Google, Facebook, etc.
is there is such thing exits than why hosting provider suspend site when site start getting high traffic, its marketing gimme created by some big companies, nothing else, when it comes to reality these host are the first one to suspend site with little high load
Because it does NOT exist. Don't be fooled by providers offering this. It's marketing BS. There are limitations in the fine print.
Hosts can't offer unlimited services because unlimited doesn't exist, but customers can't use unlimited data anyway because they would need to create infinite data. Just like a buffet doesn't have unlimited food but its still all you can eat. Most customers will never "eat more" than they have and those that do usually are abusing cheap shared hosting to save a few bucks. Shared unlimited hosting is fine for the vast majority of websites out there.
Isn't that just a prejudiced view? What evidence do you personally have - I'm talking about real evidence here, not some anecdotal evidence? Any site causing a high load, on any shared hosting - irrespective of hosting company - is likely to fall foul of Acceptable Use Policies. As I've said before, unlimited is not the same as unrestricted, and that's where people go wrong thinking it's a licence to do what they want. The fact is the restrictions that all hosts apply regarding resource use such as CPU, RAM and Disk I/O are designed to protect the majority from the minority that may abuse server resources. None of these restrictions have any direct effect in stop people using bandwidth or diskspace for their web site. Are there some less than scrupulous hosts around who will drop a site for high traffic rather than high resources usage? I'm sure there are. I'm also sure there will be many who will genuinely provide no limits to diskspace or data transfer, as long as that site's resource use does not exceed the limits set. There are always some sort of limitations but these limitations are rarely centered around diskspace or bandwidth - except in hosts who DON'T offer unlimited, strangely enough. Why are you so sure it doesn't exist? I'm positive I'm not imagining that most of the biggest shared hosting companies in the world offer unlimited plans. It's not a figment of my imagination. And, when it gets down to it, will a host who offers a limit to diskspace really allow a customer to use all that space? I'm sure the intention is there, but what happens if it's a small site using a couple of GB of diskspace, but one that is seriously affecting the performance of the server? Does the fact that they are only using 2GB of the 10GB diskspace they are allowed have any influence on the decision that host is going to have to make? Will the really say, "Ah well, they're not using up all the diskspace I allowed, so they're not doing anything wrong". Of course not. That host will have to shut the site down, or restrict it some manner, until this is solved. That's no different from an "unlimited" host. Try telling that to a mathematican or physicist. And there you have it! You're exactly correct. That's the point. Why would you need unlimited amounts of disk space? You only need to be able to provide as much as people want. That's not setting a limit (no limits = unlimited). I don't understand why people have a problem with this principal. I'm glad there's someone else who understands the concept. I understand what you're saying, but it would be more accurate to say that most customers will be unable to eat more than the restaurant is able to provide, so the restaurant is always one-step ahead of their customers' appetite. It only has to be able to provide a single meal more than their customers will need to be offering them no limits - they don't need to stock inifinite amounts of food. And that's true again. What many shared hosting customers are frightened of (this is my opinion) is being hammered for exccess bandwidth or diskspace bills, or exposing themselves to the same. There was a time when these could be seriously scary amounts of money for just a few MB of excess usage. They want the assurance that their hosting costs X per month and that it isn't going to cost any more. They have a budget. You also need to consider that most customers have no idea, up front, how much diskspace or data transfer they will need. They don't like this situation, so what an unlimited host does is give them the assurance that the hosting plan can accomdate their web site with no problems. As hosts, we all know that diskspace and transfer is the least of our worries. What we're concerned about is reliability and performance, and these are the issues around which restrictions are applied and Acceptable Use Policys are written. These concerns are not limited to Unlimited hosts. Don't misunderstand me. While I understand the concept of "unlmited diskspace and data transfer" I don't like it. Not because I don't think it's possible, but because hosting customers don't truly understand the concept or appreciate that it's got more to do with how much CPU and RAM your site uses than the amount of diskspace, and it's these things are going to get you in trouble with a shared hosting company. Diskspace or data transfer rarely come into the equation.
I appreciate all comments. but the purpose of this thread to know at what point we have to leave "unlimited" shared hosting and move on to a vps/dedicated service. I am only concerned about hostgator, bluehost etc..
"Unlimited" is a buzz word to sucker you in, like "unlimited" plans on cell phones. If you think everything is unlimited, run a very MySQL intensive application like a forum and see how quick your account gets suspended. I help move people off of shared hosting to either virtual private server or dedicated hosting and that "unlimited" thing just sticks in the customer's head so much it drives me crazy. "but they said unlimited..." yes, you got lied to and prepaid for an entire year! We know that!
That's the problem with hosts who have an issue with "unlimited" offers. They make a blank statement, assume they are an oracle, and think that their words alone carry the weight and authority to make what they say true. I say, "PROVE IT". Unless you've a coherent arguement, that can't be beaten, then you're only blowing hot air. Come on, back up your words, and stop making empty statements. And your example falls down at the first hurdle. What's a MySQL intensive application got to do with diskspace or data transfer - the elements that people say can't be provided? Every single host - EVERY ONE OF THEM (I like to emphasize the point) - has restrictions on resource use, mostly CPU and RAM. Your little example is going to fall foul of all shared company policies whether they are hosts with stated limits or hosts offering unlimited. What does your example have to do with unlimited hosts, "suckers", or anything else? And I've already covered that. The problem with the selling of unlimited is not the concept or offer, but the fact that the those purchasing these offers don't seem to understand what they are buying. Just because they can use as much diskspace and data transfer as they need, doesn't mean they have free reign to run CPU and RAM intensive processes on a shared server to the detriment of others. The restrictions on CPU and RAM usage do no directly affect the ability of a web site to use as much diskspace and data transfer as it wants. No, you know that the person buying the plan didn't understand that unlimited disk space and data transfer wasn't the same as unrestricted use of a server's resources. Are hosts to blame? Possibly, but considering that many people on here who are supposed to be technically minded, maybe even hosting companies themselves, can't understand the principals behind offering unlimited hosting, what chances does the average non-technical web site owner have? Am I saying there's no unscrupulous hosts? No, of course not, but many companies offering unlimited aspects to their plans do offer it genuinely.
There is no set time. If you can understand the concepts here, you'll appreciate that the only time you with HAVE to move will be when you're using too many shared resources to sustain your plan on shared hosting. However, it's not just about when that limit is reached. If your site is making money, or you want more privacy, or you need a server configuration that isn't available with shared hosting, then these are equally valid times to start looking at a VPS or dedicated server. Unless you're being forced, then it's a decision that only you can make. Moving to an unmanaged VPS or dedicated server isn't just a case of transferring your site and "away you go". There's lot of other things to consider like, securing and managing the server, other software such as email, FTP, DNS, databases - who's going to install them, configure them, manage them? In many case a VPS or dedicate server is like being handed a Pc with an operating system installed. That's what it comes with, and it's up to you to make it work and serve web sites. It's not something you just "do" or enter into without doing some research first.
nothing is unlimited Seeing as how a simple 500GB diskdrive is around 50$, you can see where this marketing strategy hits a solid financial rock. And that’s just part of the hardware. How about bandwidth, servers, cooling, electricity, staff, support, back-ups,