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.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Can someone explain why block storage is so much better than NFS?
For one: Try to add a /home2 directory to cPanel for new accounts on NFS.
I'm sure there are other cases of software that doesn't treat what the OS sees as a network mount similarly to how it would treat a mount that appears, to the OS, to be an attached hard drive.
It actually works as intended.
root can be root without all that squashiness.
There's no futzing with exports.
You can actually use filesystem features and not just lowest common denominator.
You can actually use the -p flag of cp, tar, etc. without it being silently ignored.
Your rm -rf won't fail because NFS won't let you unlink some .nfsXXXXX you didn't create.
You can boot off block storage.
You can mkfs block storage.
You can run, swim, and shower in block storage - it's like your very own hair!
Etc. nfs is a fine idea, poorly implemented but not as bad as other things. I mean, most things in IT are fine ideas that are poorly implemented...including block storage.
Practically speaking, in public clouds, if you want NFS, you're going to be creating your own VM and running it as your own NFS server. Double the price, double the work. OTOH you can get block storage without having to admin the block storage server, so that's much more attractive.
NFS works like a file storage service (like FTP etc) while block storage appears like just bunch of disks.
It's not "much better", it's just difference use cases. You definitely want NFS if you want to share files. You'll have to go block storage if you want to install your OS off that drive.
not arguing it as an alternative, just saying Amazon sells storage 4x cheaper and Linode is charging out the ass.
https://aws.amazon.com/ebs/pricing/ they do have 2.5 cent ("cold hdd") block storage. No idea about redundancy.
If a provider offers high performance expensive storage, that's great, but they're not a full-service provider unless they also have lower performance cheap storage. Looks like Amazon has both, for some definition of cheap.
Actually, that's enough for a 3TB/4TB HDD here in Portugal. <.<
At least 3TB, brand new.
In Linode's case it sounds like it's HDD and still .10/GB.
.
Well that's really dumb. Definitely sticking with DigitalOcean / OVH
Yes, they state it is NVMe/HDD and when I reached out on Twitter they responded "You'll see performance up to 150MB/s and up to 5K IOPS."
If DO and others with a pure SSD solution can do better then it's a bit disappointing price wise.
150 MB/s fast enough for most use case.
a bit disappointed with pricing, but I only need 20 GB more still cheaper than get another box tho
NVMe running on an IDE interface?
As it's a shared resource it's probably an imposed limit to make things fair.
I thought they use tiered storage.