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.
GreenHostBox Review
Green HostBox Review
Heyo, I'm making this review because I've recently purchased a vps from them, and well.. It's freaking amazing, I've categorized my opinions easily for you guys to see 
Performance
Well, first of all the performance is just simply insane, I did a simple bench.sh. The results speak for themselves.
Support
The support team is great like on most hostings. They were helpful and whatnot, I can't really talk all day about them since I didn't need much help other than asking couple of questions, but still we're great to talk to.
Worth the money? (Conclusion)
Absolutely and I really would recommend you guys check them out, you won't regret it a single bit.
I also forgot to mention their vpses come with free null route protection, and a uptime guarantee.
Also this is my first review so take it easy on me ;-;
Proof of Ownership
Thanked by 1GreenHostBox
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
7 whole days to say a provide is amazing, amazing.
Why not? If it's good.
How do you know it is good? After 7 days you can't possibly know that. You know it's been good for 7 days. What happens on 8th day if something happens. You need to take more time to REALLY evaluate a provider. These fluff reviews are just crap. Honestly it looks like you were compensated for it. You may not have been but hell, I can't tell.
I know for sure that it's been up. I know for sure that it's not sluggish. I know for sure that the support is great. It shouldn't take you more than 7 days to make a choice whether to recommend them or not.
I'm aware something could happen during years/months but thats then this is now.
A reliable, well thought out recommendation takes a lot longer than 7 days to make. I can't wait until this node is full and you see what I mean.
From their recent offer thread, they state to use raid 10 spinning disks, platters don't hit 1.4GB/s. Maybe I'm wrong I've never seen it.. Not bashing anyone lol, just something doesn't seem right here.
Then we'll see wouldn't we? Hehe.
Are they using ploop? Post the output of "df"!
Nice I/O Speed, glad your enjoying hosting with them. Note even if John was using ploop i don't think he'd use it to make his nodes look better.
@vladka24 Thanks for writing a review on us! Feel free to contact us if you need anything.
@MCHPhil said:
It looks your only intention here is to bash us. We have multiple nodes in stock so overloading our servers would be unnecessary. We do use 4x HDD in RAID-10. Have you ever heard of "ploop"?
I would appreciate you to point out where I have said anything bad about you.
Now if you are using software to artificially inflate your I/O... I do not follow OVZ any longer. So knowing about ploop? Nope, but I do see via a simple google that you can make things appear better than they are with ploop. That is not something I want to ever get into.
If you have no knowledge of OVZ then please don't post false facts. You sound like you have no clue about what you're talking about. http://openvz.livejournal.com/40830.html
You seem to not understand that a 4 spinning disk raid 10 array will never see 1.4GB/s IO speeds. That is fact sir. Please answer my previous question about where I have said anything bad about you.
Ploop allows you to disregard /dev/zero and I bet other fun things so it would allow you to artificially inflate your results.
I never said I have no knowledge of OVZ. I have not offered OVZ in many months. Ploop is a new feature of OVZ. It would be very reasonable I wouldn't know the inner working of ploop.
Go ahead and explain oh mr smart one, how do 4 spinning disks reach 1.4GB/s?
Source for the /dev/zero comment: http://kb.sp.parallels.com/en/117816
Source for other people seeing inflated results with Ploop containers: http://lists.openvz.org/pipermail/users/2014-May/005598.html
@linuxthefish, it appears you may have more knowledge than I in this area. Am I close with my assumption?
I think 1.4GB/s is a false value.
Here is the test from my GreenHostBox-VPS:
Look at that!
bench.sh uses /dev/zero...
io=$( ( dd if=/dev/zero of=test_$$ bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm -f test_$$ ) 2>&1 | awk -F, '{io=$NF} END { print io}' )The disk IO is inflated, and skipping the disk and only happening in memory.
@GreenHostBox any comment on this?
Have you read the article I referred you to you?.. Your negative toned comments implied to me that your intention was to bash us. I do not wish to argue with you anymore as you are unwilling to understand how ploop works.
We have enabled ploop months after we started deploying OpenVZ servers so any VPS servers that were created before ploop was enabled doesn't have ploop. Thus, you may not have ploop for your VPS.
Jesus, Phil just turned my happy review into a flame war who has the best results.
Whoever thought deceiving people would piss someone off?
I am not arguing, I am stating fact and backing it up with sources. Yes I read your link, what does it have to do with the price of tea in china?
If you could even refute 1 claim in this thread. It would be something, sticking up for someone that has used your services for 7 days, taking advantage of a system that is designed to handle things a certain way, /dev/zero, and exploiting it to make your nodes look better. Not the way to react. It is all deception, and I'm not a fan.
Let's apply a 7 day recommendation to something like a car, do you see how asinine that is now? You wouldn't buy a new car and then recommend everyone you know get one after not having an issue after 7 days.
Did we ever claim that our IO speed is around 1.4GB/s? It shows 1.4GB/s due to the use of ploop and we use ploop because it has many great benefits, not because it makes our node look better. Everyone knows that HDD can never achieve that high of an IO speed. The article you referred to me states, "simply drops I/O writes if the zero content like from /dev/zero". Yes I agree and I have no control over this. It's the way ploop behaves.
You are accusing me out of no where that I am deceiving people by how ploop is making my IO look better which my intention wasn't to make the IO look higher. My intention for the use of ploop is from its benefits. Your intention was to bash us thinking that we are deceiving people into the high IO speed when we're actually not.
You really made a fool of yourself here and showed your lack of professionalism.. editing your comments to hide your negative words.. To show that my intention wasn't to make my IO look higher, I have configured ploop to show a more accurate IO speed.
@MCHPhil you are coming across poorly. One provider bashing another one for a "hunch"...not good.
And yes you did "say something bad" about them...you insinuated that they paid off the OP.
Your first post on the thread should have been enough.
Read that article again, it goes to say how to enable and / or disable it...
If you think speaking my opinion is bashing someone I'm sorry. I think he did that to himself by not listening to what I was bringing to the table. A quick, yes, the IO is inflated due to the way ploop handles /dev/zero would have been awesome, not saying oh it's because your not using ploop. Or telling me I know nothing about OVZ, it seems from the posts here I may know more about ploop than the host with just a simple google search. No, he wouldn't see those speeds using ploop or not using ploop, UNLESS he is writing zero's. Who does that?
The results do not speak for themselves. This is not a review. This is a I've had good luck with a host for 7 days post and an inflated benchmark.
Once again I'm sorry if you can't see why this is not good for the community.
Honestly I thought this would go the way I outlined above, host would say yea ploop handles /dev/zero in a smart way.
Not sure about that, no where have I posted anyone IO speeds or better results. It's about being honest and truthful. The review you posted is half ass. 7 days? Come on. The IO speed is inflated a TON also. Why not post a ioping or other "better" benchmark? Host this is open to you also.
@MCHPhil I was referring to the download speeds.. I also had no intent for how the results will come out.
Stop hinting that I got paid or was given a vps that had these results. I bought the vps like any other person would.
They obviously said that it's HDD not SSD so anyone savvy enough would know the results might be altered by something, like for example disk caching which makes the ram look as if it was being used by applications.
Is it their fault? Nope.
Is it a bit deceiving? Yup, but does it make the host or the service bad? Noooopee.
You're obviously butthurt and trying to make my review seem horrible. I gave it 1 week not one day.
Since it bothered you so much and to show that our intention wasn't to deceive people, I have configured ploop so it shows a more accurate IO speeds.
[root@server ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test_$$ bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm -f test_$$
16384+0 records in
16384+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 4.56811 s, 235 MB/s
Why you edit your comment to hide negative words?
Are you still trying to stir an argument? Hide what negative word?
Not by far, I hope I show you how stupid that comment of yours was. It is CLEAR that I edited my posts to add more information that could be of relevance. There has been no argument here. You can't argue when someone is presenting you with facts and sources.
So what did you gain today? Being completely butthurt and ruining a review with complaints about the I/O being altered because of ploop?
Where in your facts and sources lead up to your claim that I'm purely using ploop to make my I/O speed higher? I never claimed any HDD or my node could reach an I/O speed of 1.4GB/s. I believe anyone would know this for a fact. The main intention why you came in with a bad mood and stirred an argument is because you thought I was trying to mask my I/O speed. I never disagreed with any of the sources you provided. The only thing that I'm disagreeing is your claim that you think I'm using ploop just to artificially inflate my I/O speeds to make the server look good. I'm also 100% positive my intention wasn't to deceive people. I am using ploop for the benefits that it provides, not to mask my I/O speed.. Now all this is a fact.
Looks to me like you and your provider are the only ones butthurt about what has gone down here. Your review is half ass for more than the ploop reason. As stated, 7 days is not enough time to correctly judge a provider. If you think it is, you're wrong.
The IO speed is what your provider decided to hone in on, so I went down that road with him. Notice I didn't see the IO speed until 3 posts in? I didn't even need to see it to tell this review is craptastic.
Your review wasn't ruined as there is no review here. Just a statement saying things have been fine and dandy for 7 days.
Hell the provider even learned something about his system he didn't know! Good day for me
Wow, you can see I didn't bring up your IO until some posts in? I see that, why can't you. You were the ones who honed in on this. You tried to pass it off like ploop makes things worlds better, when that is not true at all. Your response to your own customer when he points out the IO was inflated was to DEFLECT and say well you're not on ploop so... When that is COMPLETELY false. Even if he was using ploop, he wouldn't see those speeds in the real world EVER. No one writes zeros to a disk. So yeah I think what I think because of your actions and your providers actions. You may not be using ploop to purely make your benchmarks better but you sure have no problem falling back on it. As your response to your client showed.
Take it or leave it, I'm done with these shenanigans.
That is what we call "assumptions". A review is a review. There are no requirements where you have to use the VPS for x amount of days to post a review. I didn't see the I/O speed that OP posted because I skimmed through the screenshot. I did however read the review. To one of my customer that posted his I/O speed, I simply said he wasn't seeing that high of a value because he isn't on ploop. I never claimed ploop made our I/O speed better and I never claimed 1.4GB/s was our I/O speed. Maybe you got the wrong understanding. In all, my pure intention of using ploop wasn't to mask or make I/O look good. My intention was for its benefits that came with using ploop.