Does that 1% matter to you?
After being around LET for a while now, you kind of know which providers are more reputable than others. Either you have tried them before and you've read some reviews. Good providers are not cheap. They come with a price.
And I believe that the true LEB'ers here definitely have their "premium" providers that they use for more important "production" ready stuff and also their al cheapo providers that are so cheap with not so serious stuff on it and its just one of those VPS's that you buy because its cheap and you are just hoarding more and more to let them idle.
I guess my question is, for your more serious stuff, are you willing to pay much more just to achieve that extra 1% uptime?? I'm talking about like 2-4 times what you'd normally pay for a LEB. Just for that 1% extra uptime.
After a while counting all the money I spent on these cheap $10/year boxes, I noticed I could have gotten myself a reliable VPS and just stick to one. : \
- Are you willing to pay more to achieve that 1% extra uptime?53 votes
- Yes, I am willing to pay much more (double, triple)18.87%
- Yes, but only willing to pay slightly more37.74%
- No, I really just go for value for money43.40%
There's more to "quality" than uptime figures.
It depends. If someone has a redundant setup, then it doesn't matter so much. If they don't, then then the difference between 99% uptime and 100% uptime is a lot.
There is no guarantee whatsoever, that the so called "premium" provider will not go down. Invest (mostly your time) into figuring out how to build a setup that doesn't suffer much from provider downtimes. And yeah, of course, do not bother with $10/year bottom of the barrel crap from unknown (or known-to-be-crappy) providers.
i thinck 1% in most of realistics clients is important, let imaginated Black Friday , if your webpage is down only for 1 hour for Important clients this meens many many $$$$ lost so is 2 clases of clients . Most clients need Cheap but some % clients need security and uptime wich is open to pay a rezonable price for this services.
and yes @rm_ you have reason of this example 10 $/year
If I am to host any websites of mine, my email or in short stuff that I want to access the moment I need, I would. And I do.
But not just for that extra 1%. The quality of hardware, speed and et cetera are also important factors.
At least I wouldn't select the cheapest or "so good to be true" quality hosts for important stuff. They usually make you say "not-worth-it" after a while. A host that never goes down is what I'ld usually go with for important stuff.
I beg to differ, the best of the providers here are cheap.
They might not the cheapest offers, but you're still paying buttons for quality services with those providers.
All of my current services with providers from LET have >99% uptime anyway. So, for the poll, no I would not pay 2-4 times the price (to get >100% uptime?...) because we can get excellent services for 1 times the price.
Personally, depends what I'm hosting...
If you pick well, you get more than 99% uptime. If you know how to setup redundancy, you have much better uptime than AWS for half the price at most and 5 times as many resources, and if you use 3 providers, the price will still be lower than AWS, you will likely have 100% uptime, barring the carriers having a hiccup at the other end (3 providers are likely to be geographically diverse (they should!) and even multihomed, while the other end is always unknown).
I have always found the most well known LEB VPS providers tend to be much better and more reliable than the mainstream, overpriced hosting companies (e.g. HostGator). Why pay more for something you can get for half the price, and double the quality?
To me 1% is nothing, really it can have 50% uptime as I have another 12 machines working along side so if one goes there is another 12 waiting. The likelihood of 12 machines going in different areas of the world is highly unlikely near impossible.
Or you could just pay for two quality ones instead of 12...
I don't care about the extra 1% uptime. As long as the providers do not take my money and disappear.
when you have a LEB addiction thats hard
If 100% uptime is advertised then I expect 100% uptime. If they advertise 90% then I'm fine with it as long as that's what's advertised. If they advertise something and cannot consistently deliver then it's fraud IMO (I know things happen and sometimes they can't meet their SLA, but I expect a detailed RFO with an account credit and an outline of how they will prevent that same outage in the future even if that means packing up and moving to a new network).
If I'm looking for a vps for my production websites then I always go with one of my goto quality providers (Ramnode, Linode, VULTR, Leaseweb, and Quadranet Infracloud)....infact I go with those providers anyways! I mean Ramnode, Leaseweb, and VULTR are already really cheap and all three give you great specs for the money so why risk going for an unknown provider or some summer host just to save a few dollars? I guess to each his own though
you can get amazing stability for cheap with Ramnode, Vultr, DigitalOcean. I dont know how the other shit stays in business.
Vultr imagine if a disk went so would a lot of customers.
DigitalOcean imagine if a disk went, no-one would know
Given the size of Vultr I am sure a disk or two must have gone by now.
because you know, if a company doesn't give the specifics about the level of raid they use, its soooooooo logical to assume that they do not use any!
I know what your getting at; they refuse to acknowledge or divulge information on any RAID setup they may or may not have.
I'm saying given the size of the company a drive or two must have failed so far.
But the largest issue is how many users on that 1 disk say the use the Intel 960GB SSD the $5 plan is 15GB thats 64 $5 plans to a disk. If one fails someone is going to post a topic on LET or WHT or any other forum and then down goes vultr. If one or two have failed its amazing we havent had a "down with vultr" thread based on a actual failure
And yet no threads seem to have appeared.
That is assuming they don't use RAID, they haven't flat out said yes or no they just refuse to talk about it.
For me it's not only that 1%, it's also the support and the "qualtity" which matters.
Just to put things into perspective, if you do the math, 99% uptime means that in any given 24 hour day, you will be down 14.4 minutes.
24 hours in a day X 365 days in a year gives you 8760 hours. 99% uptime means that 1% down equals 87.6 hours, or 3.65 days. Or in minutes, it means that every 24 hours 1% down means down for 14.4 minutes every day.
If you are running a client site where they are paying you for 24X7 uptime, you may fall short. If you are running a personal site , hobby site, or whatever that isn't client-centric, then 1% may not be a big deal to you.
I really dont understand what the fuss is with Vultr. Some people may tell you the moon and the stars, this does not mean shit for the average Joe CEO here,many people were caught out lying, including the darlings of this place some time ago. They are still held in high regard, while Vultr, for NOT saying anything, are automatically considered liars and thieves, not worth a try?
True, DaveA behaved like a dick, yet he offers a high quality product, more performance, in more locations and at times cheaper than DO, but the most important thing is that they offer freedom of OSes and kernels, still, we do not appreciate that?
I am sorry, but I do not agree, while I am for full disclosure and been even scolded for going in too much detail, I do not agree all people having secrets are criminals, in this case it can be a legit reason, he wishes to protect his proprietary format or combination of tools to run a highly effective, redundant and secure setup. Do not forget that, rather than a disk failing in a raid, much more can happen, such as volume mismanagement and corruption in many storage systems, yet, in many months, havent heard of this in Vultr, kudos to them!
You must be working in the branch to really understand how hard it is to run such a business, may lose it when scolded by some people.
Yep. Chart: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_calculation
Availability is not the only reason I buy premium. The other parts are (a) premium environment (performance, network, etc.) and 24x7 support. Some of my favorite LEB providers don't really have 24x7 support or at least don't promise it. Much of the time I don't care, but sometimes if things go down at 2am, I don't want to wait hours for a response.
Also, premium environments often have genuine HA. If the physical server underlying my Azure VM dies, the VM comes up automatically on spare nodes. I don't have to wait for the provider to repair the node. A lot of LEB providers don't have HA/failover (nor do I necessarily expect them to at their price levels).
Yeah, with premium providers you get quality...with LEB providers sometimes all you get is qualtity :-)
@rm_ 's advice (don't simply rely on 1 provider) plus:
"just 1% uptime difference" is a couple of days/year!
There actually are very good providers and offers here.
Moreover I think the compromise is not in uptime but in quality and amount of bandwidth and resources (less disk, etc.).
Of course there are providers who grossly overbook, but there are also those who don't. If one choses well it comes down to getting less (quantitatively) but not worse. If that is sufficient - and for many customers and many jobs it is, then I see no reason whatsoever not to go with a 5$ or 7$ VPS.
As I myself rarely write tickets I don't know about that. Maybe support is also somewhat slower and less intense and quality but then, hey, humans are among the more expensive factors for providers and if you really need much hand holding then you should pay for it. Support is not an aside but a major part of the product and providers are justified to be payed for any non trivial support.
I thought this was going to be about the New Gilded Age.