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

Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 712 posts

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#631

Post by wiredfool »

wiredfool wrote: post #353
atomic128 wrote: post #282

As a customer of Linode, I feel like I'm getting a lot, maybe too much, for the money I pay. For $5 per month, I have a CPU running continuously near 100% utilization, training and retraining L1/L2/L3-CPU-cache-resident transformers, looking for patterns in futures and options markets. This kind of extreme resource utilization is becoming more common, and these businesses have to adapt to stay profitable. I expect Li…

Hetzner, in volume, is about 5x cheaper than limped for my workloads. Limped is 2-3 times cheaper than AWS, but AWS has a few things going for it that make it worth it for some workloads.

Linode. Decking autocarrot.

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#632

Post by not_your_vase »

StressedDev wrote: post #526
not_your_vase wrote: post #6

Ahh, yes, the good old "here, you purchased X amount of things for $Z. But don't dare to use everything you paid for, or we double the price"

I think you are probably misreading the situation. My guess is that their costs went up and they are now increasing their prices so they don't lose money.

Dunno... my reaction was for this sentence specifically:

  > Until this change, customers who have used fewer resources have covered the costs [...] for other customers who have used much more resources.
This does sound to me like "here, all 20TB is yours, but make sure you don't use more than 2TB, or else" - regardless from which angle I look at it.

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#633

Post by rat9988 »

rapind wrote: post #536
tyingq wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can be terrible. But it is dirt cheap. So if you use their stuff in a way that you can recover somewhere else if they have issues, you save a lot. As you mentioned I would stay away from them for things like domain hosting. Just use them for cheap compute, etc.

Would you recommend vultr for dedicated metal? I’m lazily shopping around for a decent dedicated metal setup, but I need something reasonably reliable.

Hetzner and Ovh are very reliable unless you need to reach to support.

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#634

Post by wang_li »

michaelt wrote: post #615
immibis wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you pay $5 and use $100 of bandwidth costs, you are in fact being subsidized by other users, not by margins. We don't know what OVH pays for bandwidth though.

If I order some shoes from Amazon, I find them uncomfortable, and I return them for a full refund causing Amazon to incur a loss - have I been "subsidised" by other customers? Personally I would say if Amazon makes a profit selling you a book and makes a loss shipping me some shoes which I return, the loss was paid by Amazon, not by you.

Yet book prices will be adjusted so, on net, Amazon does not lose money.

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#635

Post by RealStickman_ »

christophilus wrote: post #616
mafuy wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, a month ago they did not know that insane tariffs are going to exist suddenly. They are telling this pretty much as soon as they could.

There are no tariffs yet until January, and they don’t apply to Germany, anyway. This has nothing to do with tariffs.

This increase only affects the US regions, so it very likely is in preparation for additional tariffs.

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#636

Post by kuschku »

consumer451 wrote: post #378
ajb wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replying here as your other question is at max thread depth: A non virtualized Linux install isn't more locked in than a docker install, as for a bare metal server you are choosing your own OS. I have done the docker thing on a bare metal server, but that's because I wanted to run multiple services on it and isolate them operationally.

> A non virtualized Linux install isn't more locked in than a docker install Again, sorry for my ignorance here, but if not virtualized, how does one move hosting providers otherwise? My experience is limited to either running all the bash commands in an install readme, or installing a docker image. So there must be something in-between, to recreate a linux install elsewhere? > Replying here as your other question is…

Imagine you'd set up your own server at home.

You'd buy a computer, plug an install USB drive in, and install ubuntu.

Then you'd connect to it via SSH, configure it, maybe install docker and set up your docker containers, etc.

A dedicated server is very similar.

The server is sitting in a datacenter at hetzner, and you usually install an OS with a button in the management UI, sure.

But everything afterwards is the same. You just connect via SSH, install docker or k8s and your services, maybe an nginx, etc.

You also have an option to request KVM access. That allows you to control the server as if you had connected a keyboard and monitor to it. You can even enter the BIOS to diagnose issues, if you'd like.

Personally I've got an install script that automates everything and sets up kubernetes and automated encrypted backups. Then I just deploy everything else with k8s.

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#637

Post by oarsinsync »

rendaw wrote: post #541
matt-p wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is a meter attached Yes, of course. Having flow data (or monitoring ports/interfaces) for traffic engineering and management is pretty essential, not least for determining when capacity upgrades are needed. I understand both sides of the argument here. The idea of offering "unlimited" is appealing because most users of a typical 2GB RAM virtual machine (as an example) consume less than 1TB of bandwidth per month. O…

> it reasonable for a $5/month virtual machine customer to use 1Gbps 24/7/365, potentially consuming $100–$200 worth of bandwidth It's reasonable for OVH to prevent that, and it's also reasonable for OVH to explicitly and clearly define the limits up front.

It’s also reasonable for OVH to not do that, as most of their customers don’t understand 95th percentile billing, which is the model that they’re being charged at by their transit suppliers.

It’s also reasonable for OVH to not do that, as most of their customers dont understand that transit costs blend with port costs depending on destination, and some destinations are effectively ‘free’ to send/receive from (fixed port costs only, no marginal costs), and other destinations are not (marginal costs associated with transit supplier fees).

The billing model consumers want is a simple BW used calculation, without facing the reality that if they consume their entire BW allowance as quickly as possible, it incurs order of magnitude higher costs than if they consume it at a trickle over the whole month.

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#638

Post by RealStickman_ »

ihateolives wrote: post #591
n144q wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had exactly the same experience. I even provided my real drivers license -- something I normally would never do. Didn't convince them I am a real human being that matches what's on the ID. I never understood why people think so highly of Hetzner.

> real drivers licence Drivers licence as a personal ID is not really a thing in Europe. It's accepted at some places, but either passport or your state provided ID-card is much preferred.

An EU drivers license should be fine, as that is an official form of ID. But for anyone else, they'd need an international form of identification.

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#639

Post by [deleted] »

saurik wrote: post #626
ghssds wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

View this as an insurance and it suddenly all makes perfect sense. You pay a little more so if this month your usage pikes, you won't get a surprise invoice you didn't budget for, and you won't get cut either. At worst, you'll get rate-limited. This price stability is valuable and paying extra to get it isn't being charged an unfair price. Of course if you don't find it beneficial, you should choose another offering.

This is only relevant because the cost of bandwidth is excessively high--much higher than it should be--and so people essentially need to pay for this gouging-insurance.

[deleted]

Re: Hetzner cuts traffic on US VPSs, raises prices

#640

Post by oarsinsync »

chipdart wrote: post #557
matt-p wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is a meter attached Yes, of course. Having flow data (or monitoring ports/interfaces) for traffic engineering and management is pretty essential, not least for determining when capacity upgrades are needed. I understand both sides of the argument here. The idea of offering "unlimited" is appealing because most users of a typical 2GB RAM virtual machine (as an example) consume less than 1TB of bandwidth per month. O…

> However, on the other hand, is it reasonable for a $5/month virtual machine customer to use 1Gbps 24/7/365, potentially consuming $100–$200 worth of bandwidth? Irrelevant. If you sell a vCPU with enough bandwidth to feed your 1GBps 24/7/365 needs, and you charge $5/month for it, then it matters nothing what's your personal notion of reasonable. What matters is the service plan offered by the cloud provider and the…

> What matters is the service plan offered by the cloud provider and the performance indicators they are contractually obligated to meet

Indeed, and those indicators are specified in the contract, not in the headline product description. There are a lot of people unhappy that those indicators in this contract are not specific enough. Those people shouldn’t buy these contracts.

(Also, if you use your 1Gbps port at full speed at the most peak time for bandwidth utilisation, for 37 hours in a month, and not at all outside of that, assuming 20 cents a megabit with 95th percentile billing, the costs you’ve incurred to your provider are $200. Also it doesn’t matter at all what you do after those 37 hours, the costs to the provider are the same. You doing 300TB in a month costs the same as you doing 16TB, if you do the 16TB the ‘wrong’ way.)

Post reply on HN