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

Linode Nextgen: The Network

blog.linode.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 193 posts

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#161

Post by josephb »

ceol wrote: post #133
notacoward wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the SSD providers who cost many times more than Linode? I've tried a few SSD-based instances. Storm is pretty good, but considerably more expensive. Cleverkite and Digital Ocean are both far worse. I wouldn't trust any valuable infrastructure to a provider who offers fast I/O on a crippled network, or who only lets you do fast I/O for a couple of seconds before your instance gets throttled into oblivion, eve…

I switched from Linode to Digital Ocean due to price, but I'm not familiar with which of those two descriptions fits them. Could you elaborate? I haven't experienced anything yet that would lead me to believe they are "far worse;" their network doesn't seem crippled, and my IO-heavy site (imageboard) isn't throttled.

Wonder how sustainable Digital Ocean's pricing is in the longer term.

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#162

Post by josephb »

xur17 wrote: post #50
Expez wrote: post #14

I have recently been thinking about moving to digitalocean, because they look like excellent value. I haven't made the move yet because of inertia, and Linode's customer service which is just mind-blowingly good. I suspect that in a couple of days I won't be able to spot a single patch of greener grass on the other side of the proverbial fence.

I really wish DigitalOcean provided more then one core on their plans with < 2gb of memory. Despite that, I am probably going to move to the 512mb plan in the next year or so (once I get around to it). The backup feature is enough incentive alone.

I wish Digital Ocean supported IPv6.

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#163

Post by notacoward »

MertsA wrote: post #137
notacoward wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the SSD providers who cost many times more than Linode? I've tried a few SSD-based instances. Storm is pretty good, but considerably more expensive. Cleverkite and Digital Ocean are both far worse. I wouldn't trust any valuable infrastructure to a provider who offers fast I/O on a crippled network, or who only lets you do fast I/O for a couple of seconds before your instance gets throttled into oblivion, eve…

I'm running a VPS with RAMnode and it's been nothing but roses. Here's a benchmark on my VPS http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2012/11/20/UMLXH3qNTNOyfbGF And here's a bunch of SSD VPS plans sorted by IOPS http://serverbear.com/compare?Sort=IOPS+Seek+Benchmark&O...

That's a really handy list. Thanks!

I did give RamNode a try today after seeing them mentioned here, and they do indeed seem to do a good job of delivering on the SSD promise. I'll probably stick with Linode in NJ instead of RamNode in Atlanta (because the way I use my machine means that network latency to places near my home matters a lot more than disk performance) but it's nice to know that at least one vendor finally seems to be getting it right.

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#164

Post by silasb »

windexh8er wrote: post #111

I'm actually most unimpressed with the vendor selection. So now Linode has Cisco overhead in their premium tier of hardware. Not good from a costing perspective. The Cisco Nexus line is hardly next generation when it comes to R&S product. Linode is in a position to seriously consider SDN and they shoot themselves in the foot with one of the most stagnant companies as it applies to new and innovative product for pushi…

I wish I could find cheaper Juniper gear on ebay to help study. What hardware is currently there is 10x more expensive than what Cisco has. :(

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#165

Post by dharma1 »

pavs wrote: post #10

I never quite understood the love for premium vps like linode (also remember slicehost?). If you check out lowendbox vps, their top-rated providers almost always beats linode (and alike) in almost all category you can think of. Its nice that they are now increasing the bandwidth cap, but it was on the low side to begin with. My takeaway from this is that "linode finally joins everyone else in network speed and bandwi…

The thing with low end boxes are that you never know how long they're going to stay in business for, or whether your data is going to be safe

With Linode I can at least sleep in peace, even if it costs a bit more

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#166

Post by pyre »

mootothemax wrote: post #151
pyre wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I should be registering my domain with Network Solutions for $34.99/year, right?

So I should be registering my domain with Network Solutions for $34.99/year, right? Can you explain this to me? I'm not sure I understand. If it's domain management you're after, MarkMonitor's the usual choice IIRC.

I just looked up an example of domain registration that was obviously more than the usual $7 ~ $10 per domain per year. I mean the domain is a pretty important piece of your business (i.e. you wouldn't want to lose it), so only an 'idiot' would go with GoDaddy/Gandi/NameCheap/etc right?

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#167

Post by mootothemax »

pyre wrote: post #166
mootothemax wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I should be registering my domain with Network Solutions for $34.99/year, right? Can you explain this to me? I'm not sure I understand. If it's domain management you're after, MarkMonitor's the usual choice IIRC.

I just looked up an example of domain registration that was obviously more than the usual $7 ~ $10 per domain per year. I mean the domain is a pretty important piece of your business (i.e. you wouldn't want to lose it), so only an 'idiot' would go with GoDaddy/Gandi/NameCheap/etc right?

I mean the domain is a pretty important piece of your business (i.e. you wouldn't want to lose it), so only an 'idiot' would go with GoDaddy/Gandi/NameCheap/etc right?

You're aware that there's a difference between "go with the cheapest" and "go with the most expensive," right?

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#168

Post by coldtea »

pavs wrote: post #10

I never quite understood the love for premium vps like linode (also remember slicehost?). If you check out lowendbox vps, their top-rated providers almost always beats linode (and alike) in almost all category you can think of. Its nice that they are now increasing the bandwidth cap, but it was on the low side to begin with. My takeaway from this is that "linode finally joins everyone else in network speed and bandwi…

>Edit: wow, thats a lot of hostility... didn't realize linode reached fandom status. I guess I should keep my opinions to myself then?

Sometimes, yes. In this particular case you were comparing apples to oranges.

Take for example your opening line: "I never quite understood the love for premium vps like linode".

The statement is absurd -- even if one includes the part about low cost VPS being faster.

The idea behind "premium VPS" (or premium whatever) has to do with support, reliability, them being around a while, etc.

Some cheaper VPS offering "more bandwidth" or "faster cpus" is not the same thing at all.

Now, if you had said "there are cheaper VPS just as reliable and with good support as Linode, and on top of it, faster also, so why _pay_ a premium", that would make sense. If you could also support it.

But a statement like: "I don't understand premium X" in general?

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#169

Post by coldtea »

packetslave wrote: post #46
dean wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" ... and they tend to scrape by just barely exceeding 99.90% [uptime] " Wow. That sentence makes 99.9% uptime sound really shitty.

Do you consider a 45-minute outage once a month to be acceptable? Maybe for the price, it is.

Well, if we are being pragmatic it sounds totally acceptable for any kind of business.

Except maybe if those outages hit them at the worst possible moments of the month (just before a major announcement or something).

Now, managers would froth at the mouth hearing 45 mins/month is acceptable. But those managers are idiots.

I haven't seen any major site that didn't have those (and worse) outages.

5-6 hours a year? Heck tons of sites had those. AWS had them (and thus Heroku had them), GAE had them, Twitter had them, Tumblr (well they had one-two orders of magnitude more), etc.

45 mins a month represent lots of lost revenue to you? Really? If you're not Google or something, then what exactly do you do?

Shouldn't that be like 0.1% of your revenue? And that IF you sell online and IF we assume customers aren't gonna come back. Heck, you lose more because of random fluctuations in buyer preferences than that.

Re: Linode Nextgen: The Network

#170

Post by agwa »

josephb wrote: post #159
jnw2 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is linode announcing their own netblocks under their own ASN, though? My impression has been that you have more diversity of immediate upstreams than linode...

No. Linode use IP space provided by the upstream they use at each location.

That was true in the past, but more recently they've been using their own IP space allocations, but having their upstream announce it as part of their (the upstream's) AS.

See: http://bgp.he.net/search?search[search]=Linode&commit=Se...

Post reply on HN