Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


UrPad's poor support and terrible service.
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

UrPad's poor support and terrible service.

Ever since UrPad switched to RLT (Root Level Technologies) the support and service has gone to crap.

Recently a couple of months ago they switched from Colocrossing to their own boxes, while I was happy to move my three servers into these new nodes in LA once notified.

Since then problems upon problems my god I've never raised so many damn tickets in my life!

Let's start with poor support, Luis oh Luis a support tech that really has no idea sometimes, apart from his constant mistakes, pinging the wrong IP, only investigating part of the ticket (eg list two IP's only checks one) and more! his responses to tickets are far worse than his reading skills

"As we're hardly working on it and I will update you once the server back to online.We need your patience during this time."

Then we have these excuses common with UrPad

"I have disabled some of the VPS's which were consumed huge load on the server.You should now get some good I/O speed from the server."

"I believe there might be some abuse activity on going with the node and we will take a look into it and update you back. "

"We are sorry for this and this should be fine (we have made some tweaks in our hardware node)."

They think they can resolve by moving my container to another node. (oversold much?)

A while back @ChrisMiller mentioned that they were going to switch up their support, I'm not the only one that's had trouble with Luis (if that's it's real name) in the past/future, but this hasn't happened.

Now lets travel into the whole of poor service,

~# dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=8k count=256k
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 280.552 s, 7.7 MB/s

Ouch! sick of this, it happens pretty much every week, I report it and the usual response of "abuse" or "tweaked the node" comes up but the fix always seems to be temporary.

Currently still running a speed test (http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/13786/coded-a-speedtest-script-that-test-your-server-s-upload-and-download-speeds) will update when it finally finished.

Rant over.

Thanked by 1DragonDF
«1345

Comments

  • 8 kilobyte blocksize in dd test? that' s pretty low

  • ATHKATHK Member
    edited December 2013

    Daniel,

    I see that the you are using the block size as 64K whereas the default block size sector defined in our server is 4k for read and 4k bytes for write so please use the bs value as 8k instead of 64k in the dd command

    dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=8k count=256k

    @TheRedFox

  • How about the ioping?

  • Network Speed

    ~# wget dl.getipaddr.net/speedtest.sh 2>/dev/null -O- | bash
    -------------Speed test--------------------
    Testing US locations
    Speedtest from Los Angeles, CA, USA [ generously donated by http://maximumvps.net ] on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 21.08 MB/sec
            Upload speed: 5.66 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Los Angeles, CA, USA [ generously donated by TeraFire, LLC ] on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 10.30 MB/sec
            Upload speed: 13.70 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Dallas, TX, USA on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: .85 MB/sec
            Upload speed: 1.72 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Chicago, IL, USA [ generously donated by http://vortexservers.com ] on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 7.84 MB/sec
            Upload speed: 1.02 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Buffalo, NY, USA on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: .49 MB/sec
            Upload speed: .68 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Beauharnois, Quebec, Canada [ generously donated by http://mycustomhosting.net ] on a shared 1000 Mbps port in / 500 Mbps port out
            Download Speed: 11.22 MB/sec
            Upload speed: .68 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Atlanta, GA, USA [ generously donated by http://hostus.us ] on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 0 MB/sec
            Upload speed: 1.16 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Clifton, NJ, USA [ generously donated by http://dedicatedminds.com ] on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 4.28 MB/sec
            Upload speed: .85 MB/sec
    
    Testing EU locations
    Speedtest from Tallinn, Estonia on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 2.48 MB/sec
            Upload speed: .30 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Milan, Italy [ generously donated by http://www.prometeus.net ] on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 5.00 MB/sec
            Upload speed: .35 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Frankfurt am Main, Germany [ generously donated by http://www.prometeus.net ] on a shared 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 3.58 MB/sec
            Upload speed: .37 MB/sec
    Speedtest from Bucharest, Romania [ generously donated by http://www.prometeus.net ] on a semi-dedicated 1 Gbps port
            Download Speed: 4.91 MB/sec
            Upload speed: .42 MB/sec
    Speed test from Hampshire, UK [ generously donated by ForthCloud https://www.forthcloud.com ] on a dedicated 1 Gbps port + shared 10Gbps port
    ^C
    

    Had to cancel it, was going for over an hour.

  • MorningIrisMorningIris Member
    edited December 2013

    My LA vps is going 17mb/s, pathetic.

  • Excuse me if i'm doing this wrong? had to install ioping took 5 minutes..

    ~# df -h
    Filesystem      Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
    /dev/simfs       40G  4.6G   36G  12% /
    none            384M  4.0K  384M   1% /dev
    none             77M 1012K   76M   2% /run
    none            5.0M     0  5.0M   0% /run/lock
    none            384M     0  384M   0% /run/shm
    none            100M     0  100M   0% /run/user
    
    :~# ioping /dev/simfs
    ioping: failed to open "/dev/simfs": Operation not permitted
    
    ~# ioping /
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=1 time=23.6 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=2 time=17.3 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=3 time=33.1 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=4 time=50.5 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=5 time=14.3 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=6 time=18.4 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=7 time=9.6 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=8 time=12.2 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=9 time=31.1 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=10 time=13.6 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=11 time=14.4 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=12 time=12.6 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=13 time=16.9 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=14 time=18.5 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=15 time=331.1 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=16 time=37.6 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=17 time=18.4 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=18 time=25.0 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=19 time=40.0 ms
    4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653): request=20 time=33.0 ms
    ^C
    --- / (simfs /vz/private/16653) ioping statistics ---
    20 requests completed in 20315.2 ms, 26 iops, 0.1 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 9.6/38.6/331.1/68.0 ms
    
  • Sorry to hear this, but, maybe the node you're in is having an abuser, or maybe overloaded.

  • @ErawanArifNugroho said:
    Sorry to hear this, but, maybe the node you're in is having an abuser, or maybe overloaded.

    Once a week? anyway it probably is, since they don't seem to monitor their own hardware..

  • c0yc0y Member
    edited December 2013

    @ErawanArifNugroho said:
    Sorry to hear this, but, maybe the node you're in is having an abuser, or maybe overloaded.

    ATHK said: 4096 bytes from / (simfs /vz/private/16653):

    >500 containers on a node is overloading? sarcasm (openvz starts counting at 100, when a container is destroyed it usually keeps counting. The 16.7k are the amount of containers EVER provisioned on that node)

  • @c0y said:

    Thanks, you give me another knowledge now :)

    So, is it possible to still have those 16K containers running till now?

  • Yeah, Urpad's server upload speed is pretty bad. They're actually the reason I made the speedtest script, so I could get a full picture of a server's network capabilities.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @c0y said:
    The 16.7k are the amount of containers EVER provisioned on that node

    Not really, solus keeps count of the containers on all the slaves. That is total in solus till his container got provisioned, and yeah, it does keep counting. Destroyed containers leave gaps, but, again, that is not node counting, but total in all locations with the same master.

    Thanked by 1DalComp
  • Ever since UrPad switched to RLT (Root Level Technologies) the support and service has gone to crap.

    Lowend VPS with cheap price don't seem to make much money sometimes even lose money until they get bought by a bigger company. Some upgrade the service quality after merge, some don't.

  • UrPad was owned solely by Chris Miller now a "bigger" company has purchased them they've gone to shite.

    It only takes a second to look at RLT's portfolio on their website to see how many companies they now own, this is no excuse to provide poor support and services to clients...

  • kyakykyaky Member
    edited December 2013

    @ATHK said:
    UrPad was owned solely by Chris Miller now a "bigger" company has purchased them they've gone to shite.

    It only takes a second to look at RLT's portfolio on their website to see how many companies they now own, this is no excuse to provide poor support and services to clients...

    When you saw their doing a merge of a multiple nodes into their Huston node. oh boy, the overselling reached the new peak. just my opinion, no proof.

  • 3 days now still resolution and no response in over 24 hours.......

  • Why aren't you moving to another provider and be done with it instead of opening 500 threads for the same company :)

    If you need a server in Dallas, go with Catalyst or Prometeus.

  • @ATHK
    Do your BACKUP files as fast as you can (if this is possible).
    Maybe if you open 1 or 2 more tickets Randal will give you 24h to get out. But do not mind, he usually do it in Sundays. You have more 48h until there.
    Or, you can only do what @serverian suggested: GO AWAY before Urpad kick your ass saying your opened a lot of tickets or you are a bad client.
    No, do not wait for REFUND.

    Get out! It is your best choice.
    We have here a lot of good providers.

    Type: URPAD in the search here or in WHT and you can read more about this company.

    And as I am already here:
    Randal, when will you REFUND my money and SEND ME MY LAST FULL BACKUP?
    When will your company reply BBB's letter?

    Thanked by 1cause
  • @serverian said:
    Why aren't you moving to another provider and be done with it instead of opening 500 threads for the same company :)

    Because I'm cheap and can't be bothered moving everything over!

    If you need a server in Dallas, go with Catalyst or Prometeus.

    Perhaps :)

  • Finally got a response.

    Daniel,

    At this point, we have shutdown the VM which was consuming more CPU and i/o whereas we can get only 40Mbps. As all the VPS servers hosted on this physical servers are busy one and we can't increase further more.

    We can do one thing, we will be getting a new LA server in another 4-5 days, we will migrate this VPS (xx.xx.xx.xx) to that new one.

    So in other words all there clients are on this ONE server..?

  • @ATHK said:
    Because I'm cheap and can't be bothered moving everything over!

    All you need to do is asking a backup of your VM or container and any provider would be able to import that image easily.

  • What RAID are these servers running?

  • @serverian said:
    All you need to do is asking a backup of your VM or container and any provider would be able to import that image easily.

    That is if Luis actually has the skill to do it without screwing everything else up...

  • @Jeffrey said:
    What RAID are these servers running?

    The dd test results seem to indicate they're using no RAID and rewritable DVD's instead of hard drives for storage. :)

    Thanked by 2iKeyZ Maounique
  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    DomainBop said: rewritable DVD's instead of hard drives for storage

    Hey, I did that :)
    Anyone remembers DVD-RAM ?

    Thanked by 1tux
  • painfreepcpainfreepc Member
    edited December 2013

    @Maounique said:

    i had software that would let you use CD-RW's as a HD it was very cool..

    i think it's called "DirectCD"

  • Are you serious about BACKUP in a DVD?

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @DragonDF said:
    Are you serious about BACKUP in a DVD?

    Haha, worse than that, at that time I was using it as live storage :P My 6 GB HDD was full, so, I said, wtf, lets see how DVD-RAM will do and it was acceptable, even though died in a couple of weeks.

    Thanked by 1DragonDF
  • Maybe it is possible to use Blu-ray?
    :)

    You gave me a good idea. hohoho

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    Be aware it will die soon and speed will be trash compared to today disks :)

Sign In or Register to comment.