111–120 of 231 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nearly no web framework is per request multi core (e.g. multi core HTML / JSON rendering, assuming backend operations already async). So each request will be slow. [Edit:] Not sure for the downvote, would be interested what's wrong in my comment.
Go's net/http framework uses a go routine per connection.
I've been very pleased with http://packet.net and their typo 0 server. It's bare metal, but much more performant than here. They have an amazing network, it's by the hour, and it's Also they're based in the US, so less latency for those of us with primary customer bases here. We use them at DNSFilter in NYC as part of our anycast network, for the last two months. Looking forward to their San Jose and Amsterdam datace…
Free data in? (Like AWS)
How would this compare to Hetzner offerings? https://www.hetzner.de/hosting/produktmatrix/rootserver
I don't think there's much to compare there. Hetzner's servers are a completely different price range. Unless you get a used one here: https://robot.your-server.de/order/market (URL looks suspicious, but it's Hetzner, I promise). These are servers that are fairly old and out-dated and whose users have discontinued their contracts; now they're being auctioned off so Hetzner doesn't have to throw them out. But these, I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"unmetered" is a popular dedicated hosting company marketing trick. things are generally oversubscribed to horrifically oversubscribed and you'll be very hard pressed to sustain 100Mbps 24x7 for a full day, let alone a full month.
I pushed on 2 instances around 150Mbit/s with no problems at all :)
It seems impossible to find a low-cost server with some big, slow spinning disks on it at the moment. I'm really not sure why.
Anyone got any recommendations there? Where would I look, if anywhere, for, say, 4Tb of storage attached to a low-cost virtual or dedicated server, for less than Google Nearline or equivalent?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm happy to run any benchmarks people like (within reason). I can also compare to most AWS instances if you like.
Please run nbench [1]. I ran it on the C1 in April 2015 and got the following results: CPU : 4 CPU L2 Cache : OS : Linux 3.2.34-29 C compiler : gcc version 4.8.2 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.8.2-19ubuntu1) libc : libc-2.19.so MEMORY INDEX : 5.859 INTEGER INDEX : 8.164 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 5.770 For comparison, here are an Intel Atom N450, a Core 2 Duo L7500 and a Raspberry Pi 1 Model B: CPU : Dual GenuineIntel Intel(R) Atom(TM)…
==============================LINUX DATA BELOW===============================
CPU : GenuineIntel Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630L v2 @ 2.40GHz 2400MHz
L2 Cache : 15360 KB
OS : Linux 3.13.0-37-generic
C compiler : gcc version 4.8.4 (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.1)
libc : libc-2.19.so
MEMORY INDEX : 35.003
INTEGER INDEX : 33.843
FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 45.870
Baseline (LINUX) : AMD K6/233*, 512 KB L2-cache, gcc 2.7.2.3, libc-5.4.38Dammit. Cheap - very cheap - for everything but storage. It seems impossible to find a low-cost server with some big, slow spinning disks on it at the moment. I'm really not sure why. Anyone got any recommendations there? Where would I look, if anywhere, for, say, 4Tb of storage attached to a low-cost virtual or dedicated server, for less than Google Nearline or equivalent?
I've tried the C1 to run JSPWiki on Tomcat, but it didn't work. I guess too little RAM. I'm sorry to see that there is nothing inbetween a C1 and a C2.
I've been very pleased with http://packet.net and their typo 0 server. It's bare metal, but much more performant than here. They have an amazing network, it's by the hour, and it's Also they're based in the US, so less latency for those of us with primary customer bases here. We use them at DNSFilter in NYC as part of our anycast network, for the last two months. Looking forward to their San Jose and Amsterdam datace…
Packet's 0 server is Atom C2550 and costs 36$/month.
Scaleway C2S server is the same Atom C2550 but it costs ~$13/month.
Scaleway C2M is C2750 which has twice as much cores and costs ~20/month, so I am not seeing how it is possible for Packet 0 server to be "much more performant" when in fact Packet's offering is so much weaker.