71–80 of 145 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Find me a viable candidate who will work for the people and I will.
Gary Johnson isn't as insane as the other two.
It's the same price as AWS's General Purpose SSD EBS volumes. https://aws.amazon.com/ebs/pricing/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Effectively their trademark policy is to automatically side with the trademark holder, irrespective of fair use[1] (see page 9+). Did you miss that? It's not infringement if it falls under fair use. They were not following their TOS because they did not confirm the content was infringing a copyright
Expecting a hosting provider to wade into fair use waters hand-in-hand with you is generally unwise. The vast majority will not unless you are a large customer with your own legal staff on retainer to provide the appropriate legalese/notices/etc.
That said, the original reporting on this and the statement from DigitalOcean are at odds (Motherboard's update with DO's statement), and since I haven't verified either, I'll retract any specific support for either side of this particular instance.
This is EXACTLY the thing that I need for one of my droplets! I love how there is nothing "special" about it - it's just a disk that you can attach to a droplet. I'm sure that under the hood there's some kind of magic going on, but it looks like it's nicely abstracted away. This is what I hoped block storage would turn out to be - here's a block device, use it like one. As soon as this rolls out to the region I've go…
Same here. My $5/month droplet is sufficient for all my needs, except it's a bit limiting on storage. $2/month for an extra 20GB, doubling my storage, would be great. I don't want to migrate anything and I don't care about more CPU or RAM, I just want more space!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well except being 4 years late to the block storage game? Seems they have an uphill fight. Aws and gce match them on low end droplet price and offer much more. No local ssd but not sure what % of apps really need local ssd. DO effectively forces you to pay for local ssd for all of your servers.
Well, they beat Linode.. With DO, at least there is an additional option available for users. With GCE and AWS, the outbound bandwidth is expensive. 1TB = $90 (AWS, GCE) vs 1TB included (Linode, DO).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well except being 4 years late to the block storage game? Seems they have an uphill fight. Aws and gce match them on low end droplet price and offer much more. No local ssd but not sure what % of apps really need local ssd. DO effectively forces you to pay for local ssd for all of your servers.
Well, they beat Linode.. With DO, at least there is an additional option available for users. With GCE and AWS, the outbound bandwidth is expensive. 1TB = $90 (AWS, GCE) vs 1TB included (Linode, DO).
When they launched they just felt so far ahead of everyone else (1/4 the price of linode for SSD!). But price has been static for 5? years, so feeling lessing exciting these days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Network block storage isn't inherently broken, the initial EBS implementation was frankly just unreliable. We've not had anything like those dark days with Persistent Disk. It's still true that having your storage across the network opens you to networking failures taking out your storage, but the gain in durability and maintenance pays for it (in our case, live migration would just be crazy with local spinning disks…
> in our case, live migration would just be crazy with local spinning disks, we tried it didn't work It looks like Exoscale does live migrations with locally attached SSDs.
Been there, done that, don't want to sit staring at consoles waiting for live disc migrations ever again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's against DO's terms of service to "use the Services in violation of the copyrights, trademarks, patents or trade secrets of third parties", which appears to be the issue here. https://www.digitalocean.com/legal/terms/
> Effectively their trademark policy is to automatically side with the trademark holder, irrespective of fair use[1] (see page 9+). Did you miss that? It's not infringement if it falls under fair use. They were not following their TOS because they did not confirm the content was infringing a copyright
i'm under the impression that "fair use" is a defense and/or judge's assessment, rather than something "civilians" can factually declare.
Spun one up and ran some quick numbers on a 100GB volume: root@ubuntu-1gb-nyc1-01:~# time dd if=/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-0DO_Volume_volume-nyc1-01 of=test.dat bs=1024 count=10000000 10000000+0 records in 10000000+0 records out 10240000000 bytes (10 GB) copied, 58.0655 s, 176 MB/s real 0m58.248s user 0m2.608s sys 0m41.604s Some quick observations: * Easy to add one when creating a droplet; by default they let you create v…
I can't help but I note that you benchmark the drive with a block size of 1024. Minimum block size of a modern SSD is 4096, anything lower would just cause unnecessary load. Also if you want to benchmark a drive/block storage I highly recommend using fio.
I have been asking for non-SSD on DO for a long time now. My heart jumped when I saw the HN title, only to be dashed on the rocks. What are us data nerds supposed to do? We want to take 10 terabytes, run a batch process on it, keep the 20TB, then continue with about 5GB of working data until the next month's terabyte comes in, then we want to batch through the 21TB. Right now the price slider doesn't even go up to 21…
The reason we focus on SSD exclusively for most of our services is that there are obvious performance benefits and as we look into the future the prevalence of spinning disk will continue to decrease over time.
That being said, if we are only providing SSD there are going to be customer use cases where it's not going to make sense, but that's also part of looking into the future.
So you should be able to create a larger striped volume to run through your batch processing and then depending on how you plan to access that data afterwards you can ship that off to an object store if it's going to be accessed infrequently.