New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
Review BuyVM KVM256 San Jose
I'm rarely doing this...
It's because I got announcement from them via email that they will do "network maintenance" ( Sunday October 14th at 2:00AM GMT-7), so I DID THIS! lol
Thanks for the great service, @Francisco
OS: Debian 6 32-bit Node: SJ-kvm06
dd if=/dev/zero of=iotest bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm -rf iotest 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 9.24799 s, 116 MB/s
$ wget freevps.us/downloads/bench.sh -O - -o /dev/null|bash CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31230 @ 3.20GHz Number of cores : 1 CPU frequency : 3192.746 MHz Total amount of ram : 248 MB Total amount of swap : 484 MB System uptime : 14 days, 17:52, Download speed from CacheFly: 81.0MB/s Download speed from Linode, Atlanta GA: 4.37MB/s Download speed from Linode, Dallas, TX: 11.6MB/s Download speed from Linode, Tokyo, JP: 10.9MB/s Download speed from Linode, London, UK: 8.03MB/s Download speed from Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 13.0MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Singapore: 6.83MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Seattle, WA: 31.4MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 51.0MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Washington, DC: 10.8MB/s I/O speed : 82.0 MB/s
# cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 42 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31230 @ 3.20GHz stepping : 7 cpu MHz : 3192.746 cache size : 4096 KB fdiv_bug : no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug : no coma_bug : no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 13 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc up pni pclmulqdq ssse3 cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic popcnt aes xsave avx hypervisor lahf_lm bogomips : 6385.49 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
Thanked by 1Nexus
what disk driver?
I'm using VirtIO, if that what you ask
Download speed from CacheFly: 81.0MB/s
o.O nice sum up of that; how much are you paying/month, allocations.
From their list (they rarely do specials or coupons from what i know) that is 5 dollars a month and includes 1000 GB traffic.
I'm just using their standard price, $5/mo ... no additional cost. Because this VPS is just for my little, low traffic blog.
Why pick up such a package then; their $15/yr package would be perfect ^^
OpenVZ ? naaah, I prefer KVM
Reason being ? :P
Slower reinstall, more overhead, higher price ?
Or you needed something that doesnt work on OVZ, such as IPSec or other very uncommon things ? :P
I am always curious why ppl prefer KVM for hosting.
Could be mostly psychological
Slower reinstall, more overhead, higher price ?
KVM/SolusVM has template re-installs now And paying a little more is worth it to know your resources are guaranteed.
well, I do play some tuning (kernel/tcp/etc) on KVM that I can't do on OVZ. And for what I've read, yes, I like that my resources are guaranteed.
There is nothing guaranteed. However, kernel tuning is indeed a valid reason.
IMO, for hosting, OVZ is best, is somewhat scalable, is fast and easy to setup, but it requires a serious host, otherwise there will be some problems.
I think LEB/LET offers enough data for anyone to choose a reputable host which will not leave the nodes bog down, even if they oversell a bit.
Really? Do you have the experience (From an administration point of view) to back that comment up.. just wondering.
I have setup in my lab Xen and VMWare (both in production also), KVM and OVZ (that long ago, tho) and all can be overcommited.
I see, well i can confirm that in a SolusVM/KVM environment hard drive space is 100% guaranteed, as for RAM here are the details from one of our nodes;
25.26 GB of 31.41 GB
Ram Allocated: 26.78 GB
As you can see, KVM leaves barely any room for overselling of RAM either, since the VPS will occupy whats available to improve performance. So at the side of an OpenVZ config that could be oversold by 10x if resources allow, KVM is pretty darn guaranteed
I do not contest that some types are harder than others, I just say it takes an honest host to provide not only the infrastructure, the network, the HW and all to be able to guarantee anything.
You say HDD is guaranteed, fine, but guaranteed only in volume, I suppose I could put a desktop grade 2 TB green drive and sell 200 KVMs on it, the IOPS will be oversold as hell...
Also, I could have 2 gbps committed BW and sell 10000 TB traffic, a VM is much more than HDD space and ram.
In the end it is performance that counts, if customers get what they were promised, the host can oversell like crazy, why should I care... I actually admire hosts that do it in those conditions because they probably know their trade and I feel safer they will not trash my data (DISCLAIMER: Always take frequent or continuous backups of your important data !)
I'm not good at technical term/definition, tho. But, with OVZ when your box is idle, people can get/use some of your resource (eg: RAM?) while on KVM it can't (CMIIW) -- so let say, I don't like to share my cookies... lol
On KVM they take at least your CPU share, so, no, you have a wrong idea about VPSes, the whole point is to share resources to make them cheaper and more environmentally friendly (you wont need so many servers, so much power to idle around) as well as have someone take care of it at a lower cost than if you were having the server in your home, even if we dont count hw investment.
It is a win-win situation, this is why I like the concept so much.
I know, M. VPS is not DS ..
No, but it can be better
If I get a VPS for X amount, if I spend the same on a DS i get something worse, usually, in performance, specifications and I spend more time setting it up, besides, if it crashes for some hw or other problem, I am on my own, while on a VPS someone will notice if there is a problem with the node.
Up to 8 GB or so, a VPS is sure better and cheaper if you know your providers, after that it might be only cheaper.
If you configure linux kvm correctly, kvm is the best solution. You can do a hard limit on iops, cpu and ram. So you can sell guarantee ressources.
@fileMEDIA kvm is not a better option, it is just an option.
The best solution is technically undersold openvz, as descriped by @Maounique and the origional reason for HV technology. Thanks @Maounique for describing this for me.
Cloud is not the best option based on @Maounique as it is not the most green option as we have to have multiple backup options to make it a true cloud.
Don't forget, HR/support can be oversold too!
Not sure if trolling or serious...
so good for KVM,
If you are using their ovz, the network speed is just 1.93MB/s and 1.59MB/s to Tokyo and London respectively. Sh!t, I'd better cancel all my buyvm ovz for KVM before I quit.
It's nice to see good reviews, keep up the great service at @Francisco. @Doel thanks. I was sad that I did not see more personal/text/writing, but legit benchmarks are fine I guess. Glad you're happy.
By hosting you mean (shared) webhosting? Because we can both agree that CloudLinux is a nice addition to a cPanel server for example, but it's not supported on OpenVZ VPS...
Yeah, I mean regular hosting, tho at times tomcat needs 2 vCPUs, for example and there are other java problems, but for regular php scripts, blogs, forums and the like, OVZ is great.
On the other hand it is not really stable since .32 rewrite and has a lot of horrible hacks to add functionality but I find it best for simple hosting as it is a bit elastic when lots of traffic hits, it has low overhead and is fast.
People are hosting blogs in 50 MB, try that with KVM...
Not to mention it is cheaper. For a real LE* hacker that likes to squeeze everything from the last kb of ram, OVZ must have some appeal