Websites should be containers (baffled with hosting offers)

gozen

wav3front If I offer a package with 10 websites and each website has 1vCPU, 1GB ram etc. then the whole server would be filled with just 2-3 of them.

You can offer one package with 10 accounts, so the client can create 10 different accounts with unlimited domains (or you can limit them also), and you can limit the package to 1GB RAM, 1 CPU, and 10 GB Storage.
So, those unlimited domains will never fill up a VPS with 2GB RAM, 1 CPU, and 20GB Storage.

wav3front

gozen You can offer one package with 10 accounts, so the client can create 10 different accounts with unlimited domains (or you can limit them also), and you can limit the package to 1GB RAM, 1 CPU, and 10 GB Storage.
So, those unlimited domains will never fill up a VPS with 2GB RAM, 1 CPU, and 20GB Storage.

That's not possible. The performance limits are set per website, and a package can offer many websites.
If you offer a package that offers 8 websites and each one of them is 2 vCPU/2GB, one client can theoretically fill up an 16thread server.

What's worse is that these kind of packages (5, 10 or even "unlimited" websites) are very common, you can find those kinds of offers in known hosts.

Why should someone choose a company that offers 1 website for similar price?

rdbf

The packages don't contain 'accounts'. Limits like CPU and RAM don't apply to the package, but to each website that the package allows.

Nickske00

I just offer customers one website per package. They get unlimited addon domains and techy users can setup multiple websites thay way, but I offer no support on those (clearly stated on the website).

gmakhs

Andrei in more complex setups, including forums wikis etc , that won't work because users like to use the different backup, removing addons domains destroys compatibility with other panels and breaks migrations which is also the problem .

It's not about changing the way someone things and handles his business, but how enhance will improve this state ( MVP ) of this function.

Naming it website is clearly wrong idea .

cPFence

wav3front What's worse is that these kind of packages (5, 10 or even "unlimited" websites) are very common, you can find those kinds of offers in known hosts.

Why should someone choose a company that offers 1 website for similar price?

Just set your packages to allow only one website with unlimited addon domains, and adjust CPU/RAM limits wisely. That’s basically how the big hosts do it (with Cloudlinux) , and it works much like cPanel’s model.

For backups, enable cPFence's WordPress per-install bi-weekly backups alongside the great daily Enhance backup, so if a client only wants one WP site restored separately, you’ve got it covered.

The only drawback is all domains under that package will share the same PHP version, but in 2025, that’s really not a big deal.

Nickske00

You all act like you can only sell the amount of cores available.. It's not because a package has a limit of one vcpu it is continuously using that one cpu core... I've seen people here claiming to be putting hundreds of websites on one server, or do they have cpus with hundreds of cores? 😉

cPFence

Nickske00 You all act like you can only sell the amount of cores available.. It's not because a package has a limit of one vcpu it is continuously using that one cpu core... I've seen people here claiming to be putting hundreds of websites on one server, or do they have cpus with hundreds of cores?

Any decent opitimized server with 36 cores and plenty of RAM can handle 200+ websites easily, even if each package allows 1 vCPU. That doesn’t mean every site is using a full core nonstop, limits are just ceilings. The key is having all the other limits (RAM, nproc, I/O, etc.) set wisely. We see lots of servers daily with limits set way too high, and that’s usually what causes trouble.

wav3front

Nickske00 You all act like you can only sell the amount of cores available

Not really, I just have quality of service in mind.
I don't particularly like the idea of offering unlimited add-on domains for that reason. Someone would add 20 websites to his little 1vCPU container and then cry about his sites being slow.

wav3front

cPFence enable cPFence's WordPress per-install bi-weekly backups

I didn't know that cPfence had a backup feature. I'll check that out.

Thank you sir. You've been extremely helpful.

rdbf

cPFence The only drawback is all domains under that package will share the same PHP version, but in 2025, that’s really not a big deal.

Staging will be a big problem as well, it's quite a fundamental one.

Nickske00

wav3front Then only allow 10 addon domains, not sure what changing the wording from 'website' to 'container' will solve? The system will keep working just the same. You can also create packages with 0.1vCPU and allow 10 websites, that way you have your 1vCPU per package.

Or do you see a solution in allowing the customer to select the limit when creating the website? Eg: 'You have used 0.3 out of 1vcpu, how much would you like to dedicate to this website?' I can see the support tickets coming from people not understanding all the limits...

cPFence

rdbf Staging will be a big problem as well, it's quite a fundamental one.

Yep, that one drops off the list with that setup. Clients trying to cut corners will have to miss out on some features.