So how hostings really handle WP?

[Rarst]

Having unlimited harddrive space and bandwidth is not something I would look for in a host... Basically it's over selling. I actually avoid those types of hosts.

Ehm, I was trying to say that I consider them not offering unlimited good thing. So preaching to the wrong crowd. :)

I'm interested - what meaning do you put in WP-compatible servers and WP-specific support? As you see from first post my current hosts stops at "having-wp-in-name" stage. :)

[Ipstenu]

My rules for a webhost are:

1) A 1-800 number I can call, 24/7.
2) Prompt replies to emails
3) No 'unlimited' anything (except phone calls from me to them)
4) A good to great rating on BBB

That's it. I might toss in 'up-front overage costs', but I refuse to ever again deal with anyone who doesn't have a ding-dang phone number I can call at 1am. Oh, and people who don't treat me like a moron when I call and say 'I can't SSH into my box, but I can SFTP and email, so I think I buggered my keys on my PC, but wiping them didn't help.' doesn't get me 'Did you reboot?' as the first question.

I'd like to know what on earth 'WP-compatible' and 'Catered to WP' mean, though. I mean ... You have PHP 5 and SQL? So do most hosts these days. :) Not bashing, just curious for my non-OMGBigServer! friends :)

[andrea_r]

I'd like to know what on earth 'WP-compatible' and 'Catered to WP' mean,

From a tech perspective, me too, though I have been assuming it meant, "We didn't just slap up the defaults in Apache".

doesn't get me 'Did you reboot?' as the first question.

LOL - been there. Though sometimes with an added, "OMG! It's a GIRL! I'll dumb down the explanation so she can understand it."

[Ipstenu]

I have been assuming it meant, "We didn't just slap up the defaults in Apache".

Yeah, but I'd like to know what defaults were changed :) I mean, I customized the hell out of my VPS to 'optimize' it for WordPress, MediaWiki and ZenPhoto. Are they talking 'we just added more memory' or 'We're using APC instead of Zend' or what not. Bonus points for 'We limit the number of WP sites per server to...'

Though sometimes with an added, "OMG! It's a GIRL! I'll dumb down the explanation so she can understand it."

Oh, dear god, that's always the best one. I've been known to pull the 'CEO voice' on them when they tried that and call the guys 'Sonny Jim'. (Cause y'know us gurls are too silly to comprehend editing php.ini and mod_security)

[andrea_r]

Yeah, I have one of those voices too. :D Then I haul out UberGeek over top & get real technical.

And Lord knows we wouldn't even begin to comprehend the httpd.conf now.... :D

[Martin]

I'm interested - what meaning do you put in WP-compatible servers and WP-specific support? As you see from first post my current hosts stops at "having-wp-in-name" stage. :)

It's good you brought this question up.I have been asked this question a few times in the past months and these are things I make sure my servers have/support/twaeked.

Linux, Apache, php.ini safe mode off, mod_rewrite, remote connections, latest version of PHP and MySQL, PHP memory_limit set to 64MB (since WP2.8 I have noticed memory needed to be a lot higher), a few MySQL configuration changes (max_connections thread_cache_size table_cache query_cache_size etc), a few httpd.conf tweaks (mainly keep-alive, mpm prefork and a few others).

Could list more detailed changes if you want. All in all using WordPress for about 4 years in various environments has taught me a lot about running WordPress sites etc.

The thing that helps most is not many accounts/sites/domains/WordPress installs on each server.... That is the key.

[Ipstenu]

I'll go for broke :) Mod_security. Every once in a blue moon, PHP gets narky at me and decides that the word 'from' is a bad idea and won't let me post with it. And I'm not the only one:
http://wordpress.org/tags/mod_security

What do you do about that? Or has it not come up yet?

[Martin]

I'll go for broke :) Mod_security. Every once in a blue moon, PHP gets narky at me and decides that the word 'from' is a bad idea and won't let me post with it. And I'm not the only one:
http://wordpress.org/tags/mod_security

What do you do about that? Or has it not come up yet?

Has not come up for me or any clients yet... hope I just didn't jinx it

[Otto]

I don't do hosts that use mod_security. Nothing against it, but properly written software and properly configured host wouldn't need it.

That said, when offering hosting, you can't be sure about the properly written software part. So it does serve as a decent backup security strategy. Too often though it's the *only* security strategy. I blame the name and clueless admins. "But we have security, look, it's called mod_security for crying out loud!"...

So, if the host allows mod_security to be disabled via .htaccess, then that's acceptable. If they have any sort of restrictions forcing you to use mod_security, then that's a hosting service deal-breaker.

[Rarst]

Linux, Apache, php.ini safe mode off, mod_rewrite, remote connections, latest version of PHP and MySQL, PHP memory_limit set to 64MB (since WP2.8 I have noticed memory needed to be a lot higher), a few MySQL configuration changes (max_connections thread_cache_size table_cache query_cache_size etc), a few httpd.conf tweaks (mainly keep-alive, mpm prefork and a few others).

Could list more detailed changes if you want.

I have an idea. Could you put together such a list with explanations for tweaks?.. And then we wink Jeffro into giving it a spin around WP-sphere.

I think such list would make terrific resource to choose hosts.

By the way from current personal experience a lot of WP blogs on server is BAD idea. WordPress isn't light by itself and some features like wp-cron can implode server really fast when host has no clue.

PS took a look at one of hosts advertised a lot on blogs, producing free WP themes, etc... Got to their resource usage policy - no more than 16MB RAM per thread. Yeah, that would work so well with WP. :)