If there are three Drupal sites with roughly equal traffic and a combined daily attendance of around 6,000 people, should I consider using a VPS? Alternatively, would it be more advantageous to distribute them across multiple hosting platforms?

Each hosting provider has its own defined limits for CPU usage, often disabling it altogether. However, even without explicitly stating these limits, the absence of such information can be suggestive.

Therefore, the procedure is as follows:

1) Contact support to determine the CPU usage of your sites at the time of disconnection.
2) Evaluate the cost of a hosting plan from reliable providers that can accommodate the required load.
3) Compare the pricing of hosting plans with the necessary parameters to the cost of a standard foreign VPS. In most cases, a service like digitalocean.com for $5 might suffice.
4) If the hosting option proves to be more expensive, consider whether you are willing to pay the extra amount to avoid self-administering a server.
5) Make a decision between hosting and VPS based on the evaluation thus far.

If you prefer a user-friendly interface on a VPS, you have the option to purchase a perpetual license for ISPmanager for $35. Additionally, if you lack experience in VPS administration, I would still recommend opting for hosting that offers adequate resource limits.

To begin with, it is essential to assess the nature of the traffic being handled. Differentiating between static content downloads and complex scripts that interact with a database is crucial.

Furthermore, it is necessary to identify the specific issues with the current hosting provider. If performance degradation becomes noticeable, considering a migration may be wise.

Moreover, it is important to evaluate the overall cost comparison between using two hosting plans versus opting for a VPS. Additionally, one must consider the time and effort required for setting up and configuring a VPS.

However, the question itself may be slightly flawed. If the current hosting is effectively managing the load without significant issues, there may be no need to transition.

On a personal note, I have made the decision to explore various settings and configurations, which prompted my move to a different hosting solution.

In my opinion, it seems appropriate to consider transitioning to a VPS at this point.

Typically, one server can accommodate up to 300 sites, and once the number of daily visits exceeds 100, it begins to impact the overall performance. Frequently, these servers allocate RAID5 from slower 2TB HDD for the /home directory, and even the retrieval of static content can significantly increase the server's load, potentially leading to eviction notices. This is especially true when it comes to executing scripts.

Fortunately, VPS hosting is now more affordable, offering greater flexibility and freedom in managing resources.

When can we switch host to VPS?
Software Development Company

You may notice many different kinds of web hosting providers and all of them are top of their quality.
1) Rightservers.com
2) Kvchosting.net
3) Snaphost.com
IT technicians are well-trained and absolutely committed to their clients' satisfaction.

Nice VPS hosting solutions you can find at Webhost.pro - they are experts.
They make a webhosting experience something you'd love to pay for.

All my questions are answered quickly and promptly, and the services have been excellent.

VPS can be a great choice if you're looking for more control over your server environment. With a VPS, you're essentially getting a slice of a physical server that's exclusively yours, meaning you can configure it however you like, and you'll generally experience more consistent performance since you're not sharing resources as much as you would on a traditional shared hosting plan. This can be a big deal for Drupal sites, which can be pretty resource-intensive, especially when you factor in modules, caching, and possible peak times when traffic spikes.

Now, considering your combined traffic of 6,000 daily users, if we break that down across three sites, that's around 2,000 visitors per site per day. Depending on how resource-heavy your Drupal setups are, this is pretty manageable on a decently specced VPS. You'll need to ensure your VPS has enough CPU, RAM, and storage to handle the load, but with the right configuration, you should be able to host all three sites on a single VPS.

One thing to keep in mind with a VPS is that you're responsible for most of the server management tasks, unless you go for a managed VPS. If you or your team are comfortable with server admin tasks, like setting up LAMP/LEMP stacks, managing firewalls, and handling regular updates, then a VPS gives you a lot of flexibility. But, if not, you might want to consider a managed VPS service, which can be a bit more expensive but takes the load off your shoulders.

On the flip side, distributing the sites across multiple hosting platforms can offer some advantages, particularly in terms of redundancy and uptime. If one hosting platform goes down, your other sites won't be affected. This also allows you to choose specific hosting environments tailored to each site's needs, perhaps even using different geographic locations to optimize load times for users in different regions.

However, managing multiple hosting accounts can get tricky. You'll have to deal with different control panels, possibly different support teams, and of course, keeping track of all the logins and billing. It might also end up costing you more in the long run compared to a single, well-configured VPS.
If you're comfortable with server management and want more control, a VPS could be a more efficient and cost-effective solution for hosting all three sites. But if you're looking for easier management and some added redundancy, spreading the sites across multiple hosting platforms could be the way to go. Just remember, either way, you need to make sure your server(s) are properly optimized for Drupal to handle the traffic smoothly.