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
My view is that if you are unable to hard limit a core on a KVM system then you are using the inadequate technology no matter how popular or common it is.
If the type of operation the customer is running is the kind of service a backup server is meant to run then it doesn't make sense for him to be suspended for abusing CPU.
For security purposes I would expect the encryption to be done on the source server before being sent to the backup server in order for the backup server not to be overloaded. If he is encrypting and compressing on the backup server for it to be sent somewhere else then that might cause a high CPU load.
As far as I am concerned a promise is a promise and a backup server is not something the customer is supposed to be denied access to if they are fully paid up for the relevant period.
From my perspective if @key900 wants to maintain a rep as a technically competent provider the proper thing would be to ask the customer to give you access to the server and copy the files to a protected space for the customer to download the files, ie if you don't want the customer to be running any code on your hardware.
The other option is to
ddthe whole drive image or the partitions to a place where the customer canddit back onto a new drive at another provider if the data is sensitive.Terminating a customer because you don't have the means for throttling their usage of a perfectly legitimate and predictable activity is bad form. It is not as though they are mining bitcoins or something.
I once had a provider throttle a service because
akonadiwas indexing every source file and there was a lot of source code files on the system. I opened a ticket with the provider to find out why the service had become so slow as it was mostly idle, and once the provider explained and I was able to track it down that was the end of the matter.PS. The amount of customer blaming and excuses being made for providers here is over the top. If @key900 doesn't want the customer to execute code on his company hardware, then he should simply do as I have suggested above and let the customer have his data. It doesn't make sense to diminish one's rep over $3.50. He can even refund the $3.50 as a bonus, subject to the customer withdrawing his Paypal complaint.
Even if they're consistently violating the ToS/AUP? Because that's really what you're advocating. @key900 technical skills aside, the AUP says:
Should he have been cpu capped? I'd agree with people saying so. But from a simple black and white perspective, he was repeatedly warned that he was breaking the acceptable use policy and did nothing. Then he was offered a solution and refused it. Perhaps re-read the thread? I think you might've missed some relevant bits.
Being given a backup is never a right. It's a privilege provided by good will.
Since OP couldn't care less and continued to abuse, the good will's gone.
I'm confused as to why @key900 didn't censor the client's IP address.
Whelp
Do we know what the OP was doing? (While pounding the CPU 24/7.)
Probably crawling.
No doubt a signature placed automatically at the end of every ticket. Not a great practice, I agree, but I'm pretty sure that the sarcasm wasn't intended.
Right. So he wasn't simply doing backups.
I understand the technical point that @Falzo raised (and he has a point), but however if we look at it, the OP was abusing a $3.50 VPS, and it seems to me that @key900 was extremely patient with him despite this fact.
OP claimed he was doing lots of compression or whatnot but I don't believe him.
Hello,
Sorry I haven’t much time. First i want to apologize for my agent behavior and i feel his pissed since he was taking the shift all day long alone and dealing with a lot of tickets in weekends.
Again it seems some people not reading the hole story here . The OP abuse the cpu like a month and back later without even give us 1 hour for backup the data open dispute ! I’m not sure what i had to say more!
Again i have to repeat the time line over again and OP behavior against us!
Enjoying weekend is indeed a human right.
Let people have breaks, fucktards.
There is a such a thing as being innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. So far it is @key900's word against the customer's and there is nothing to indicate that the customer did something wrong.
This is the way is supposed to go.
Provider: Your system is overusing CPU. What are you running?
Customer: I am running just some standard backup software - names the software he is runnning:
Provider: you usage is still too high for this software. Run htop or some other monitoring and sort it according to CPU and send me some snapshots at 15 minute intervals for the next hour or so.
Customer an hour later: here is the output showing what is running.
Provider: You are running standard software, but the volume you are processing is to high for your CPU allocation. Your software can be throttled using this means. If it doesn't work you have the option of paying for extra CPU or you can download your data and receive a prorata refund refund or whatever else has been agreed.
This is not a court and, based on my own experience, I will say OP is in the wrong.
OP's behavior is a common pattern seen from a certain country.
There is no proof that the customer was violating the terms of the service other than @key900's say so. In the absence of hard method of a measurement what constitutes abuse is a subjective matter. Some providers have precise measurements as to what constitutes overuse of a resource.
At they very worst the service should have been suspended and the customer asked what he wanted to do. Deleting the account was out of order. There are two sides to every issue, but the burden of proof is on the one making the accusations.
You did read page 2 of this thread attentively, didn't you?
Too much effort and mitigates the drama.
I'm glad we all agree and you can see that you were wrong.
no you don't have too. as I already stated in my first reply I am already convinced that OP is a moron.
however you are wiggling around all the time avoiding to answer the simple questions I asked.
1) did you hard limit the OP to the advertised 15% of one core, as your page says it would happen on overusage?
2) if no, why not follow your own rules instead of suspending/deleting him?
3) if yes, why suspend/delete him, if already hard limited to what he initially bought?
After reading page 2 I can see that @key900 is in the right. The customer was given more than enough opportunity to fix the problem and acted in bad faith. He even forfeited the right for the service to be suspended until he was ready to download the data.
I do accept that. My apologies.
I have a service with @key900 so I am happy to see that he's a reasonable fellow (I assume that.
It's always welcome to try to defend a potentially innocent person, but it's also always recommended to read the complete dossier before trying to do so.
I guess that @key900 wanted to give the OP a chance to change his behavior on his own.
(But, yes, ...)
T.H.I.S
If your condom broke during sex and you landed an unwanted pregnancy, I sympathise. If you went and had sex knowing you didn't have a condom with you and landed an unwanted pregnancy, I say you deserve paying child support for the next 18 years. The onus is on you to ensure you have a condom before sex, and not on the woman to ensure that she does not get pregnant after you had sex with her.
Moral of the story: you are responsible for unwanted consequences if you had every chance to prevent it. If you are lazy or you forgot, learn to suck it up like a real man.
Bloody potassium.
condoms are so 2018 STDs are a myth
Raw is war!
That was really a great metaphor, but in fact:
OP got a cheapo shared sister ($3.50 for 15%-of-a-v@gen@); decided to abuse her for days and weeks; sister warned OP, but he kept hammering without compassion; sister lost patience and finally decided to close legs, holding OP's condom hostage; OP: - wanna my condom back | sister: _- gimme 6 bucks and you can have 40% of my c**chie_ | OP: _- no way, I wanna have free fun for another 3 hours searching for my condom_ | sister: _- go to hell, man!_; OP finally panicked and decided to call LET; hours were missed discussing the feasibility of a hard cap on the sister's pu$$y usage to limit high consumption;
Moral of the story: good will's gone and the end is nigh.
EDIT: OP's condom is safe with sister.
And now vajin hang loose like sleeve of wizard
Ok it seems few people not even read and just attacking that the OP data removed but not mentioned that the data are there and ready.
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/2991764/#Comment_2991764
The OP not contact us after spamming our system with tickets.