Table limit with Bluehost

Thanks for the heads up, JoySeeker. Still have an account at Bluehost, but recently opened another at GreenGeeks. They've been promoting themselves as Drupal friendly.

In case you're interested in migrating to GreenGeeks, I've documented setting up a Drupal 7 multisite there: http://www.blogtooltips.com/drupal-7-multisite-greengeeks

Addendum

Just checked Bluehost's TOS to verify what JoySeeker said and he's dead on. Below is an excerpt from their TOS:

Accounts with a large number of files (inode count in excess of 200,000) can have an adverse affect on server performance. Similarly, accounts with an excessive number of MySQL/PostgreSQL tables (i.e., in excess of 1000 database tables) or of database size (i.e., in excess of 3GB total MySQL/PostgreSQL usage or 2GB MySQL/PostgreSQL usage in a single database) negatively affect the performance of the server. Bluehost.com may request that the number of files/inodes, database tables, or total database usage be reduced to ensure proper performance or may terminate the Subscriber's account, with or without notice.

I also am hosting over at Bluehost and noticed the recent change to their limits on database size, tables, etc. Being a long time web guru I always found it rare to ever exceed 1000 tables until recently when multi sites became popular. Now you have all these users wanting to get in on the multi site trend (see wordpress multisite, drupal mutisite, etc) so it's going to affect the servers. That is my guess why they decided to limit the tables to 1000 from 3000. In any case I went ahead and opened up a chat with them and asked them about it and they seemed to confirm my suspicions about the servers not able to handle that many tables from so many users and that they had started a new plan called their Pro package. I had one of their reps show me this:

New Pro Package Features

* Hosting on specially optimized Pro Hardware
* 1 Free Domain Name
* 1 Free Domain Privacy Protection
* 1 Free SSL Certificate
* 1 Free Dedicated IP
* 10 Free Postini Accounts
* Full Pro Access to Site Backup and Restore tool. 

New Pro Package Limits

* 2000 Max Emails/Hour (up from 750)
* 5 GB Total MySQL Databases (up from 3 GB)
* 5 GB Single Database Size (up from 2 GB)
* 3000 Database Tables (up from 1000)
* 15 Mb/s Bandwidth (up from 8 Mb/s)
* 5 Gig Total PostgresSQL Dtabases (up from 3 GB) 

So I went ahead and upgraded to their pro package after I talked with them and it was pretty seamless. I paid for the pro package and was immediately upgraded to a server with less users on it (I checked with the rep and their limit for customers per server is set lower on their pro servers). The upgrade process took less than 30 minutes and I was up and running. I have been on it for roughly 2 weeks now and I could not be happier as its the perfect median between shared hosting and vps hosting.

I don't know about you but I have had a hard time finding managed vps service that will give me all that for what Bluehost is offering price wise. I definitely think you have a good point but I just don't think managed vps is a cost effective solution when there is something like Bluehosts pro package that should solve your issue.

At 4X the cost BlueHost definitely should provide a big jump in service. Don't get me wrong, BH's support is far better than what other hosting companies provide.

I'm a bit skeptical when the terms of service increase the limitations, while creating a nifty sales package (at four times the cost). What's suspicious is the timing. It's not as if the 'Pro Package' has been around for a year. At the end of the day it looks more like a marketing ploy to push more subscribers to a higher priced package.

Your post gave me an idea and as a guru tell me what you think. What if a standardized site was built and the content was also standardized with Ipsum Lorem content, then that 'Standardized Average Site' was packaged (along with the database) so it could be shared. The idea is that volunteers would install the theme and database on a domain that isn't being used and just parked. Over time the sites could tracked on how well the 'Standardized' site performs with various hosting companies and how much performance difference there is between their hosting plans. What do you think?

The "Standardized Site" idea

That is an interesting idea. You would probably have to get an organization going to develop the standardized site. Also I'm sure there would have to be security updates and updates to the code as newer versions of php, mysql, apache, etc come out so someone would have to maintain the site as well so that may be a bit difficult. But still that is an interesting idea; as for Bluehost though I think the main thing is the support. If you purchase a vps plan it may be 19.95/m but its totally unmanaged and you are left in the dark. For someone that knows what they are doing this is not a problem but for the majority of people on shared servers they would not be able to configure apache, php, mysql, etc and keep them patched and up to date. So they figure managed vps is the way to go until they see the price tag. Also alot of people do not necessarily need vps like myself which is why I went into the pro package because:

A) it's managed at a fraction of the price as managed vps!
B) Their support is always helpful and willing to walk me through anything I need
C) The pro package so far as been the perfect fit between shared and vps hosting.

Anyway thats just my opinion ^_^

-cbinx

Concur...

True, things change, but if the Bank credit cards need to inform their users of changes by law, wouldn't you think a web host needs to? Bluehost, over the past 1-1/2 years, changed their limits. There was never an email disclosing a change, and there was never a new Terms of Service to be signed. Why, ever, would I continue to use a host that arbitrarily changes their terms after I paid and signed up with them for a specific amount of hosting service? Do you have it from them that when you signed up with the Pro service that Bluehost will continue to provide what you signed up with?

I would rather find a new host that's honest and upfront, and one who cares about their customers (and reputation) enough to provide the service the users paid for. I may not go with Managed VPS, but I sent emails to 4 shared hosting companies about the table limit, and each one gave me a direct answer about their policy. I'll probably go with the one that gave a decent (Drupal-wise) limit.

Joyseeker,

It seems to be an industry wide practice to change TOS on the fly and without notification of its customers. In addition to the BlueHost, I've got a GreenGeeks account. After JoySeeker's comment about the change in TOS, I contacted GreenGeeks about the restrictions via phone. I was told that they don't have any restrictions in regards to db tables. But that isn't the whole story.

What I don't see discussed in any of the forums is the CPU allotments allowed by any 'one' account. At any one time your account is allowed to access the CPU for a certain percentage. If you are using more than the alloted percentage, then your sites are throttled for that one account. BlueHost is the only company I've dealt with so far that gives you any idea if any of your sites have been throttled. You can find it in the CP under Logs called CPU Throttle.

BlueHost techs have indicated an account is allowed around 7% of the CPU cycles before being throttled. They also admit that it isn't an exact science and several factors determine when an account is throttled and not all of the factors are within your control. GreenGeek techs indicate that their alloted cycles were around 25-30%, but have been reduced to somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-12%.

The takeaway of this is that without some sort of Standardized Site System we will never fully know which hosting service is serving our sites most efficiently.

But, to be honest, I've never seen better phone service than BlueHost. And many times they have increased what they provide for the agreed price, not decreased it, and that has satisfied me so far.

Dpatte hit it right on the money. They are very helpful anytime I call in or chat in, they do try to be honest, upfront, and I did recently hear that they finished their data center and are expanding very rapidly. Sounds like they are trying to improve.

-cbinx

BlueHost is the benchmark which to compare all other hosting tech support. It's why I continue to have an account with them.

You can't just create more than one database?

BlueHost promotes their plan

I have yet to find a SHARED hosting company that does not impose these types of limits (cpu, bandwidth, # of files, # of databases, # of tables, size of databases, etc) It comes with the territory. You have x amount of people on a server therefor if you do not have limits in place 1 person could slow the entire server down intentionally or intentionally (rouge script, cron, etc). The thing that gives Bluehost the upper hand is that they do not outsource their support at all and for the most part keep prices relatively competitive.

When you're breaking 1000 tables on a live site you should have moved out of shared hosting quite a while ago, IMHO.

1000 tables easy to break

I went with Bluehost's Pro package (19ドル.95/mo), and they gave me a 3,000 table limit. I've outgrown this and I've just gone with a VPS, but don't yet know if my sites will be slow or not on the VPS.

On the shared end, Bluehost throttled my whole account. When I went with the Pro version, the sites were only throttled occasionally. You can see when your account is being throttled by checking the CPU Throttling icon under Logs in cPanel.

Dirty little secret

we have bad control on the number of tables in drupal. I made tests with a drupal install, activated and deactivated modules. Now I have this website with more than 400 tables.
Forget multi sites drupal at blue host in this condition

uninstall modules

Same here I just got a notice from Bluehost saying

"Our research shows that server performance degrades when the MySQL usage is over 1000 tables and/or 3 GB on a single account or 1000 tables and/or 2 GB on a single database. In order to ensure optimal performance for your account and the others in your shared hosting environment, we request that you reduce the MySQL usage on your account to under these limits by 01/02/2014."

Your account information:
Total MySQL Database Size: 1350.34 MB
Total MySQL Tables: 1658
Largest MySQL Database Size: 324.43 MB
Largest MySQL Table Count: 175

"Proper maintenance of your account will ensure the best performance for your website. If you are unable to comply with these requests your account will be automatically deactivated by 01/02/2014 to maintain proper server performance. Thank you for your help in resolving this issue."

If you are going to run drupal DONT USE BLUEHOST!!

a bit overkill

This past year I opened another Bluehost account for the sole purpose of hosting WordPress sites. WordPress installs with around a dozen tables--far below the 300+ for Drupal (that's without modules or plugins).

Installing Drupal on Bluehost amounts to self-abuse because you know your shackled from the git go.

As for Drupal sites I've had fair results with Green Geeks.

Well, Bluehost changed my PHP version all of the sudden with no previous communication, that must be nice when you run Drupal 6 and Drupal 7 Websites, isn't it?

Bluehost doesnt care about your sites

• mjolley

• Arabic
• Alappuzha
• Event Platform
• Western Ohio User Group
• Goa Drupal Community
• Liverpool
• Chandigarh Drupal Geeks (C.D.G.)
• API-First Working Group
• Compony opinionated developers
• 4SPOTS