11–20 of 20 posts
Are the cloud hosting services profitable at these very low prices or are they reducing the prices just to gain market share? If it is the latter, sooner or later they have to increase prices, no?
OVH, Scaleway, Online.net have less expensive options usually with better hardware or dedicated servers.
First, you only get a /127. Second, IPv6 is not activated by default, and for a good reason: when you do activate it, basic things like a apt-get update of a their vanilla distribution are broken.
Basically, their IPv6 peering seems so bad you can't even ping6 some ASN.
Practical example: on their Amsterdam DC, I couldn't even reach ftp.nl.debian.org (and before you ask, DNS worked just fine - I got the correct AAAA records)
When I asked for explanations and provided them a detailed ping6 and traceroute analysis showing where the problem was (and the same analysis from another server I had nearby that confirmed the problem was on online.net end), I was told to try the "rescue mode".
Lol no. I tried another company instead.
Are the cloud hosting services profitable at these very low prices or are they reducing the prices just to gain market share? If it is the latter, sooner or later they have to increase prices, no?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I swear Linode came up with an excuse to reboot my servers at least once a month.
I've had numerous VM's with Linode for several years. I am also on DO and Vultr. The only reboots I get are for hardware failures and the recent Spectre patches. I would say on average, 1 reboot every 2 years. I could be lucky though.
I've had a handful of nodes on their $20 tier for 10+ years, and I think I've had two or three unannounced reboots in that time.
The lowest high-memory plans are odd. What can you really do with 24 GB,1 Core, 20 GB SSD?
I'm stuck on Vultr still, since they're cheap and they have an Australian datacenter.
AU routing to JP is really bad (I get faster connections and better ping to TX-US servers on a lot of providers), and SG is like 120-160 ping which still kinda sucks.
OVH, Scaleway, Online.net have less expensive options usually with better hardware or dedicated servers.
My experience with online.net/scaleway from just yesterday: their peering is quite bad, and their IPv6 is broken out of the box. First, you only get a /127. Second, IPv6 is not activated by default, and for a good reason: when you do activate it, basic things like a apt-get update of a their vanilla distribution are broken. Basically, their IPv6 peering seems so bad you can't even ping6 some ASN. Practical example: o…
OVH, Scaleway, Online.net have less expensive options usually with better hardware or dedicated servers.