Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

blog.linode.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 94 posts

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#61

Post by jules »

tnorthcutt wrote: post #37
jules wrote: post #17

Why are bigger linodes relatively more expensive?

Except for the fact that the amount of transfer doesn't keep increasing past 2000GB after the 8GB plan, they're not. (If that's what you were referring to, my apologies)

There's that, and that 19.95*2 = 39.90. Sure, it's not much more expensive, but why is one 1024 linode not cheaper than two 512 ones? Surely there is some overhead in running 2 instances on one piece of hardware instead of one. Also, do you get CPU proportional to the RAM? That is, if I get two 512 linodes do I get more or less CPU than with one 1024 linode?

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#62

Post by mey »

trustfundbaby wrote: post #38
cosgroveb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You were complaining about them raising your rent (not about them not throwing in things to please). The cost of everything goes up over time. Get over it. Also your rent over the last four years was lowered by a little thing called inflation.

The cost of everything goes up over time. -------------------------- Except server costs and bandwidth, apparently ;)

Or house prices (oh wait that has direct relevance to rental unit costs)

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#63

Post by ww520 »

I have an account with Linode and loves their service; however, given the competition from AWS and AppEngine, I don't know whether I should stay. Light traffic static website can be run in AppEngine for free. AWS has some very competitive pricing for VPS. Linode's yearly $240 fee is less and less appealing.

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#65

Post by eli »

zedpm wrote: post #55
eli wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't Rackspace Cloud more expensive? Or are you just talking about storage? I think for many people, RAM and CPU become an issue long before disk space.

Unlike Linode, Rackspace Cloud decouples the server pricing from the bandwidth pricing. A base server on Rackspace is cheap and it remains so if you use very little bandwidth. If you calculate the Rackspace cost using the maximum bandwidth bundled with a comparable Linode VPS then Rackspace is indeed more expensive.

Uh, I think one of us is confused.

A base server on Rackspace Cloud is already more expensive than a comparable Linode VPS, even before you factor in bandwidth charges.

1GB Rackspace Cloud is $43.80/mo plus bandwidth. 1GB Linode is $40/mo and it comes with 400GB transfer.

http://www.rackspace.com/cloud/cloud_hosting_products/server... http://www.linode.com/index.cfm

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#66

Post by singlow »

jules wrote: post #61
tnorthcutt wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for the fact that the amount of transfer doesn't keep increasing past 2000GB after the 8GB plan, they're not. (If that's what you were referring to, my apologies)

There's that, and that 19.95*2 = 39.90. Sure, it's not much more expensive, but why is one 1024 linode not cheaper than two 512 ones? Surely there is some overhead in running 2 instances on one piece of hardware instead of one. Also, do you get CPU proportional to the RAM? That is, if I get two 512 linodes do I get more or less CPU than with one 1024 linode?

My understanding is that the 1024 server will be on hardware shared by half as many VPSs as a 512. On both of them you get as much CPU as is available proportioned to each VPS. But with the 1024, you have half as many competitors for that CPU. You also have half as many competitors for IO. Disk space and Ram are the only things that are handed out in fixed quantities.

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#67

Post by jules »

singlow wrote: post #66
jules wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's that, and that 19.95*2 = 39.90. Sure, it's not much more expensive, but why is one 1024 linode not cheaper than two 512 ones? Surely there is some overhead in running 2 instances on one piece of hardware instead of one. Also, do you get CPU proportional to the RAM? That is, if I get two 512 linodes do I get more or less CPU than with one 1024 linode?

My understanding is that the 1024 server will be on hardware shared by half as many VPSs as a 512. On both of them you get as much CPU as is available proportioned to each VPS. But with the 1024, you have half as many competitors for that CPU. You also have half as many competitors for IO. Disk space and Ram are the only things that are handed out in fixed quantities.

I see. In practice I'd expect the others on a node not to make full use of CPU, so you're getting more CPU for the same money on a 512 (unless they artificially limit it).

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#68

Post by singlow »

ajross wrote: post #5

I like Linode and use them. But 25% is almost an insult. Storage is absurdly expensive at Linode: literally 10x what Amazon charges for EBS stores (a little less, as Linode storage is local and there are no usage charges). I really wish they were more competitive. Right now I have a tiny instance running my personal email, but everything else I do looks more attractive on EC2 or Rackspace.

I think the overall value is very high in terms of CPU and bandwidth. However, I agree that the storage is a sticking point for many of my projects.

My solution has been to run my application on Linode, but I push uploaded files into an s3 bucket shortly after upload and redirect download URLs to the bucket url. Since one of my sites is a church with 50 GB of sermons on mp3, this saves a lot of money over getting storage on Linode.

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#69

Post by mestudent »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #20
CoffeeDregs wrote: post #7

I've been using Linode for about 4 years now for dev and [small] production servers. They're such a joy to use. I agree that I could probably get VPSs cheaper somewhere else, but ... meh. And, though I rarely need support, Linode's support is second to none and it's a real help with something's going wrong. More than anything, I'm happy to pay a bit extra to support quality products and services. So, joining the chor…

> I agree that I could probably get VPSs cheaper somewhere else... A couple of people have brought this up in this thread, and all I can think each time is that they must not place any value on their time or hassle when it comes to dealing with the cheaper providers.

It depends on what your using the vps for, I have a vps with prgmr and it really isn't that much of a hassle, even starting fresh with debian is a 5 minute or less process with the centos recovery.

Re: Linode turns 8; Disk space +25%

#70

Post by zedpm »

eli wrote: post #65
zedpm wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike Linode, Rackspace Cloud decouples the server pricing from the bandwidth pricing. A base server on Rackspace is cheap and it remains so if you use very little bandwidth. If you calculate the Rackspace cost using the maximum bandwidth bundled with a comparable Linode VPS then Rackspace is indeed more expensive.

Uh, I think one of us is confused. A base server on Rackspace Cloud is already more expensive than a comparable Linode VPS, even before you factor in bandwidth charges. 1GB Rackspace Cloud is $43.80/mo plus bandwidth. 1GB Linode is $40/mo and it comes with 400GB transfer. http://www.rackspace.com/cloud/cloud_hosting_products/server... http://www.linode.com/index.cfm

Yes, it appears I was using Slicehost prices rather than Linode prices because I'm in the process of migrating from Slicehost to Linode. I did the Slicehost to Cloud Server comparison because Slicehost is forcing migration to Rackspace in the next few months. A 1GB Slice is $70 vs. the $43 for a 1GB Cloud Server. Sorry for the confusion.
Post reply on HN