Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links


Categories

In this Discussion

› › Wable has done it again - Page 3
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.

Wable has done it again

13»

Comments

  • NekkiNekki Veteran

    Lee said: I don't think he does, he knows what what he is doing. Whether you agree with or not is entirely different of course. He is really not that daft, despite appearances.

    I'm talking specifically about the comms piece - I don't have any issue with the the pricing change, makes perfect sense in the current climate, it's the way stuff is communicated to customers that lets them down.

    That said, I've just seen the full email and it's actually fine, perfectly clear and well explained, and the website reflects that, so fair play @Incero.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran
    edited October 2015

    Maybe we would all do something different than what was done (I would, but I'm not them) but this is about changing policy to address the reality of the state of IPv4 addresses. Why you guys are all so obsessed with hoarding IPv4 addresses instead of fighting for IPv6 improvements is beyond me.

    Some of you guys just look like you could seriously just use a beer. Seriously @GStanley, hit me up if you find yourself in East Texas. I'm buying :)

    In before "you're biased so you can't talk about IPv4 shortages."

    Thanked by 3GStanley deadbeef netomx
  • Steven_FSteven_F Member

    @Jar said:

    Beer on you?

    Thanked by 2jar netomx
  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @Steven_F said:
    Beer on you?

    Beers all around!

    Thanked by 3GStanley NexHost netomx
  • praveenpraveen Member

    It is concerning that Wable change mind from time to time not even honoring existing customers.

    Just checked with them whether this apply for existing customers who has already assigned the IPs ( as I have 2 Ips) and the answer below.

    "This applies to all ADD-ON IPs in use from Nov 1st. You should remove IPs before then if you don't need them."

    If they continue with more changes in the plan definitely will think about moving out.

  • Steven_FSteven_F Member

    @Jar said:

    Bears?!

    Thanked by 1jar
  • MarkTurnerMarkTurner Member

    Junkless said: Something with a little more resources than wable bundle perhaps (was so cheap at 8$).

    What about location(s) or no requirement for multi location?

  • MarkTurnerMarkTurner Member

    Mun said: Delimter:

    Thats from your VPS thats been suffering a network performance problem.

  • MunMun Member
    edited October 2015

    @MarkTurner said:
    Thats from your VPS thats been suffering a network performance problem.

    Was it, I thought I pulled that one from one of your example responses on how should be??? Actually if it is, then LOL ramnode getting smacked a little bit by a server with a bad nic.

    @markturner mind posting one for me that isn't on a node that we are working on.

    Another test from delimiter:

    
CPU model :  Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           L5520  @ 2.27GHz
Number of cores : 1
CPU frequency :  2266.746 MHz
Total amount of ram : 1002 MB
Total amount of swap : 0 MB
System uptime :   1:27,
Download speed from CacheFly: 106MB/s
Download speed from Coloat, Atlanta GA: 14.8MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Dallas, TX: 53.0MB/s
Download speed from Linode, Tokyo, JP: 12.6MB/s
Download speed from i3d.net, Rotterdam, NL: 8.92MB/s
Download speed from Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 30.4MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Singapore: 6.47MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Seattle, WA: 23.6MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 23.5MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Washington, DC: 63.3MB/s
    Thanked by 1MarkTurner
  • MarkTurnerMarkTurner Member

    Mun said: Download speed from Coloat, Atlanta GA: 14.8MB/s

    That should be around 60-80MB/s depending on how many people are hammering that machine for test.

    The rest look about right :)

  • vRozenSch00nvRozenSch00n Member

    I just upgraded my Delimiter 5150 to E5420 here is the result just now

    CPU model :  Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           E5420  @ 2.50GHz
Number of cores : 4
CPU frequency :  2499.806 MHz
Total amount of ram : 4096 MB
Total amount of swap : 4096 MB
System uptime :   5 min,
Download speed from CacheFly: 106MB/s
Download speed from Coloat, Atlanta GA: 2.99MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Dallas, TX: 85.3MB/s
Download speed from Linode, Tokyo, JP: 12.0MB/s
Download speed from i3d.net, Rotterdam, NL: 17.8MB/s
Download speed from Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 90.2MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Singapore: 14.4MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Seattle, WA: 45.1MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 50.7MB/s
Download speed from Softlayer, Washington, DC: 73.4MB/s
    Thanked by 1MarkTurner
  • MunMun Member

    What @markturner determined after many attempts of us trying to figure out what the hell was going on is... coloat's test server is shit. For a few tests we can get 100+ and the next few we can barely get 10. It seems coloat is no longer a good bench to determine performance to the area.

    Thanked by 2vRozenSch00n MarkTurner
  • JunklessJunkless Member

    @MarkTurner said:

    Could use a few locations (West coast, East and EU if possible).

    Thanked by 1MarkTurner
  • MarkTurnerMarkTurner Member

    Mun said: What @markturner determined after many attempts of us trying to figure out what the hell was going on is... coloat's test server is shit. For a few tests we can get 100+ and the next few we can barely get 10. It seems coloat is no longer a good bench to determine performance to the area.

    I wouldn't hold up Coloat's as being any worse than the others. Cachefly has the capacity to handle the traffic.

    But Softlayer I was noticing traffic coming back from two different servers on two different paths within 10-15 seconds of running a test. And consistently following the same path depending on the server originating the traffic. That shows heavy variance depending on the server.

  • MunMun Member

    @markturner all the reason we need a new bench script.

  • MarkTurnerMarkTurner Member

    Mun said: all the reason we need a new bench script.

    I've been working on one that will properly test A->B and B->A (up/download) as well as limiting simultaneous tests.

    Thanked by 1Junkless
  • SpeedyKVMSpeedyKVM Banned, Member

    Thanks for the feedback everyone :-)

    Thanked by 1Jonchun
  • ReetusReetus Member

    I can predict more accounts being terminated just for making tickets like with the added backups.

  • NyrNyr Community Contributor, Veteran

    Incero said: Thanks for the feedback everyone :-)

    lol

    Junkless said: No wonder Leaseweb's/dediserve's bench results looked sub par to me. I am used to testing wable's network all day.

    LeaseWeb network is WAY better than Incero.

  • maoyipengmaoyipeng Member

    wable in seattle
    CPU model : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2643 v3 @ 3.40GHz Number of cores : 1 CPU frequency : 3400.019 MHz Total amount of ram : 512 MB Total amount of swap : 512 MB System uptime : 11:02, Download speed from CacheFly: 86.1MB/s Download speed from Coloat, Atlanta GA: 4.06MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Dallas, TX: 50.1MB/s Download speed from Linode, Tokyo, JP: 15.8MB/s Download speed from i3d.net, Rotterdam, NL: 285KB/s Download speed from Leaseweb, Haarlem, NL: 31.1MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Singapore: 6.12MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Seattle, WA: 35.2MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, San Jose, CA: 77.1MB/s Download speed from Softlayer, Washington, DC: 15.2MB/s I/O speed : 153 MB/s

  • JonchunJonchun Member

    @Jar said:
    Beers all around!

    Joke's on you! I don't drink!

    YOU CAN'T STOP ME FROM HATIN NOW

    Thanked by 1jar
  • Nick_ANick_A Member, Top Host, Host Rep

    Mun said: Buyvm and Ramnode have a multiple locations. Ramnode isn't as good of a network, and Buyvm has a little better of a network, but still not as good as Incero by my opinion.

    We have different mixes in our various locations. Do you have any data you could send me or ticket IDs I can check where our network hasn't been up to par for you?

  • MunMun Member

    @Nick_A said:
    We have different mixes in our various locations. Do you have any data you could send me or ticket IDs I can check where our network hasn't been up to par for you?

    I had some pretty bad network performance in Seattle and Atlanta . This was a bit ago and haven't looked into it more or created a ticket. At that time it seemed things were single homed.

  • k0nslk0nsl Member
    edited October 2015

    RamNode Seattle location has been crappy for me as well, and for a long time. But I don't complain as it's only used as part of an IRC node:

  • ATHKATHK Member

    @k0nsl said:

    Those colours.. Yuck, how do you read anything dark blue or purple..

  • Nick_ANick_A Member, Top Host, Host Rep

    Mun said: I had some pretty bad network performance in Seattle and Atlanta . This was a bit ago and haven't looked into it more or created a ticket. At that time it seemed things were single homed.

    Seattle was never single-homed, Atlanta was briefly 3 years ago... You made it sound like you were comparing our current network to others. We're happy to help if you see some issues with your service - just open a ticket and we'll take a look. We very rarely see network complaints unless a carrier is having trouble upstream or something.

    @k0nsl - Happy to look more into it for you with a ticket. I bet we can figure out what's going on in short order. You might want to try this out in the meantime: https://clientarea.ramnode.com/knowledgebase.php?action=displayarticle&id=55

  • MunMun Member

    @nick_a not really . Was more giving options and warnings with my suggestions .

Sign In or Register to comment.