I am having a hard time choose (runcloud vs. enhance)

sikmo

With Enhance we do have freedom with the API possibilities and the admin area is good enough for us (not for clients I think), but man, there is so many bugs. Like when I setup server + db role … db fails and server is Appache instead of OLS.

With upcoming release of API v3 from RunCloud team, I am having troubles. On one hand, RunCloud is very well built as a service, but lacks few things, that are critical in longterm and can be addressed (incremental backups to custom server, self-hosting, MySQL DB, …).

However, I create the table below to showcase my reasoning. And I would like to hear thoughts from you guys here.

Andrei

It depends on what you want to do with these tools.

Over the years, I've had the opportunity to test a wide range of tools, from manual installations of LEMP stacks to platforms like Easy Engine, ServerPilot, Forge, Moss, Ploi, GridPane, Runcloud, and now Enhance. Hands down, Enhance is the best tool out of those above if you want to sell web hosting to clients. If you wish to host your websites, go with Runcloud or GridPane.

nqnoc

I’m in a very similar situation. Also, a runcloud client for more than 2 years.

Really testing Enhance for about a month and overall, I prefer it to Runcloud. It has much more features and adds a lot of flexibility to different projects. Yes, there still some bugs and lack of some important features, but that with some time will happen.

For me the only real advantage of Runcloud is the default WordPress speed and performance. From my tests is superior than Enhance. I’m know that with a good server optimization Enhance can reach and even pass Runcloud overall performance.

Runcloud has no magic. If software stack is similar, the difference must be on settings (php.ini, my.cnf, etc..). For now I do not have the time, but when I can I, will look into the settings Runcloud adds to try to recreate that on Enhance.

Anyone using Runcloud has look into the settings they add?

sikmo

Well currently our struggle is per-website pricing. Once that is out of the way we can proceed. Imagine leasing VPS and for 15 US per month and client create like 90 apps. We would get like 1.5 US cause of that. Worse case is reaching over that limit and paying more to enhance than we get from the user. But @Adam said that this partner plan is coming soon (not sure when though).

Also the backups logic are bad, but we can recreate that via custom panel and CRON and on-demand via API. Main issue with backups is missing SFTP for incremental backups. We had to setup iSCP or what is the name to setup server within cluster to do backups.

Also PROXY with NGINX is working terribly. With RC it was very easy done. I like the API with Enhance and of-course no limits, CPU / disc limitations per user.

That bug with setting app server + db role can be fixed trying multiple times to install each role, but that is fine. For now at least.

Also would be nice to have the file manager in API.

twest

sikmo the "per website" pricing is easily manageable, just sell "websites" at 1 per hosting plan, then you can set limits to allow unlimited addon domains to their "website".

A "website" is just a container, the same as a cPanel account which is also charged per account.

That's how we have it setup. Customer buys a hosting package that includes 1 "website" that only costs us 0.15 cents, they can then add as many addon domains or subdomains as they like inside their container.

Some people like to do it the other way, sell a package that allows tons of "websites". To me that isn't economical since each "website" gets its own cut of system resources.

You just need to get over the naming convention in enhance, where a "website" isn't really a "website", a "website" is an account/container.

xyzulu

sikmo Also the backups logic are bad

Not if you setup an Enhance backup server.

Andrei

sikmo Imagine leasing VPS and for 15 US per month and client create like 90 apps.

Don't sell $15 VPS, at least not managed. $15 is a price for unmanaged, for managed start at $45 minimum.

sikmo

twest no, I fully understand website / website as you are saying. But I don't want to sell "not container VPS for WordPress". The container logic is why I want Enhance and I want our users to have it.

Note: I mean for users who buy VPS cause they need many websites (not enhance websites but normal ones meant) and I would like to have them containerised for them also.

sikmo

xyzulu no. That's not what I mean. You can't setup backup logic per website or per account but only globally. So I am forced to backup things I don't want or in scale I don't want to for specific websites.

We do have via that iSCP or what the name is setup server within our infra and have backup server in enhance.

xyzulu

When you use the enhance backups it doesn’t really matter if you back up all sites every few hours. btrfs is great!

sikmo

xyzulu and that's where I disagree. I want control over it, if I did not want more control I wouldn't have chosen enhance. The whole point is to have these options.

If you waste money on backup server then sure, but I can't now place a website like custom CDN for clients cause it will absolutely destroy the backup server. But the CDN is backuped by proxmox. What now? Just waste space because photos?

wav3front

xyzulu you mean they are incremental ?

xyzulu

btrfs .. no space is being wasted. Anyway.. I'm not arguing any further. You have obviously not installed an Enhance backup server or taken the time to understand how it works. Yes, there are not as finer grained control over backups (maybe in the future) but already the way Enhance does backups (using an Enhance backup server) is quite unique (well, other do it too.. ie Jetbackup can use rsync to btrfs destinations and you cold roll something yourself as well).

Make your choice with less emotion (waste/disagree/destroy) and you will able to make the best decision for you and your customers.

sikmo

xyzulu I am not sure why are you dragging emotions to this (that fact that I disagree or waste space is a fact, not an emotion). I am pointing facts that I can't have control over it and it does backups even for something I wish not to backup or I would like to backup in different way (less times, more times, ...).

Yes, I am wasting space if I am backuping something twice or more - that is not meant to be backup.

Btw we did as Enhance wanted and connected server via iSCSI and add backup VPS - and yet it does full backups not incremental (reported to enhance as a bug). Why are you claiming we did not when I specifically said so is beyond me. I am trying to get answers from other users, not pointing to "enhance" that something is wrong.

But yes, if you feel so strongly about this topic, please let others discuss. I am very much trying to get information how to use enhance and how others use enhance in a way I did not think of or is not suggested by enhance.

cosmoshosting

Enhance is an investment. While its lacking many important features and mostly 'just works' its going to be absolutely amazing in the next 1-2 years once the team work through a long backlog of complex features. If you can get by with its sometimes frustrating issues its certainly capable.

While its not commercially ready to be used publicly IMO compared to cPanel or DirectAdmin, from a management and operations point of view it has so much potential. If you just want a single affordable webserver that can be used today and ticks the bulk of your list, just buy DirectAdmin. If you want entire Infrastructure (Backup, DNS Severs, Mail Servers, Multiple Webservers, easy to use licencing) from $5/mo able to be managed through an easy web interface, its a no brainer.

I don't see how RunCloud is directly comparable or operatable at scale, I've been following it for a while and its sooo basic.

To address your issues

Per website licencing: Yea that's a thing and need to factor into how you licence the servers. No different than cPanel Resellers. We will see what the partner deals bring but I don't have much hope. No free lunches in web hosting anymore!
Backup Logic: Agree, it needs an overhaul and more programmability. But what exists now is incredible in terms of reliability, de-duplication ability and cost. You'd cry if you see saw my Acronis bill for other platforms.

sikmo

cosmoshosting I do agree with this one:
its going to be absolutely amazing in the next 1-2 years once the team work through a long backlog of complex features.

I see the potential, that's why we are trying Enhance. I disagree on RC that is "sooo basic", we run many things there as we would in Enhance, but maybe you run something more complex, we do not. So I guess, can be.

Licensing => it was not meant to be "I want something for free". As I said on RC forum, I am willing to throw 1350 USD per year for "unlimited" websites, which I consider fair. Maybe if there is 100+ servers the price could be higher. But to be fair, I am fine with the per-website. Except ...

The licensing problem is becoming an issue if I wish to provide VPS with "containers". Let's say I will provide 2core for 12.5 USD a month (just an example). That's 83 websites for the client. With 83 websites, I make zero. And limiting them on their VPS? Does not seem fair. Or even if they create 30 websites, I am 1/3 down from what they gave me and I have to pay electricity and connectivity.

For basic hosting, it's totally fine. I would like something like "per-server", like 2 USD per server seems fine, I can work with that. But this is just putting ideas out there, not forcing Enhance to change. Maybe others have the same issue.

xyzulu

sikmo Yes, I am wasting space if I am backuping something twice or more, that is absolutely useless.

Why?? Backup every minute.. and no more space is used (it's always incremental) and uses btrfs.
Ok, so Enhance backup doesn't have the control you are after, but it's not going to cause space issues.

Enhance backup server should be setup with a block volume attached (unformatted) and then Enhance format this as btrfs when the backup role is installed. See: https://enhance.com/docs/backup-role/installing-backup-role.html

If this isn't working for you .. perhaps wait until Enhance help you out. Then you will be in a better position to re-evaluate.

sikmo it does full backups not incremental

How are you determining that? You need to be careful using du on btrfs volumes.

twest

sikmo Btrfs is an efficient incremental backup system because it uses snapshots to capture changes without duplicating entire files. Snapshots are quick to create and only store differences between backups, so if you change just one file, only that change is saved. This reduces storage use and speeds up the backup process. Since Btrfs avoids copying unnecessary data, it’s both fast and space-efficient. I'd highly recommend you do self-learning on btrfs so you can see the breadth of its capabilities and efficiency.

sikmo

xyzulu "You need to be careful using du on btrfs volumes." Ok, thanks for info, did not know that this maybe the issue. I will check in more depth.

sikmo

twest maybe something is not working for us properly => that's why I contacted support. I would hoped that is the case, cause then it would make sense not to care.

xyzulu

@sikmo also.. I know Runcloud VERY WELL.. I was one of the most active in their community (even when it was still on Facebook).. you can probably still find many of my posts there on the current forums. I don't use them anymore, Enhance is better for my business needs. It may or may not be for you.

sikmo

xyzulu "It may or may not be for you." why do you feel the need to attack me? I am really doing all we can to switch to Enhance. I did not say anything bad about Enhance, just pointing out few things and you provided helpful feedback, in parts of your messages.

xyzulu

English may not be your first language (It is mine, but I also speak other languages) but you come across as upset and almost angry in some of your posts here.

sikmo why do you feel the need to attack me?

Sorry if I misunderstood.. if you knew me.. or checked out my posts here and one Runcloud you might get an idea on if I am a troublemaker to not. I don't want to attack you, run down Runcloud or even defend Enhance actually. This is just software.

What was your username on Runcloud forums? I may remember you.. not sure.