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 analogy would be -
This highway has 6 lanes (that is more than other highways) but the max only three lanes would be open. And customers driving the most, will be restricted to driving in one lane with 25 miles/hr speed limit.
Don't hold your breath. AFAIK they login quite rarely here.
Which provider is likely to admit any concrete info on what they consider sensitive?
No, it means that all other factors being equal or very similar that NVMe is 3 times faster than those of competitors (benchmarked so far). And as best I can tell that's still true.
AFAIK not really. They - like pretty much every VPS provider - limit the resources available to a customer (incl. IO rates). As long as customer only slightly or occasionally crosses those boundaries nothing happens. But when some customers (usually called "abusers") frequently and/or massively cross those borders they are limited.
That's not uncommon but the way most providers seems to handle it.
Yes, that's all. And that's already way more than your mumbo jumbo distraction attempts merit.
It's simple. I tested the disks you provided with the VPS purchased from you.
If I order a VPS from them, would you be willing to run those benchmark tests on my VPS to confirm that my VPS NVMe benchmark is similar to the one you tested with ?
You seem to be a decent person, so: Yes, I would.
The only problem is fio uses neither of these and uses the CPU clocksource unless explicitly overridden. From the man page:
x86 is a very real architecture, Spectre is a very real vulnerability, and KPTI is a very real mitigation. There, try again.
Can you explain why it's making
clock_gettime()
calls in a CPU test? (Again, in your attempt to prove me wrong, you overlooked the fact that I was referring to CPU tests):Thank you so much, it is greatly appreciated.
What configuration would you suggest for this test VPS? So that difference in benchmarks tests can not be attributed to the vps configuration
You'll probably misinterpret that as a victory but I won't discuss with you anymore.
I'll be nice and answer one question though:
Measuring the time each test slice takes, duh.
I'd suggest the configuration that suits your needs. The processor is the same anyway and memory will make some difference but it won't turn a slow NVME into a fast one or vice versa. And after all I guess you want to know what kind of performance you can expect for your needs.
You are welcome.
Therefore you do not know what you are testing or how, you reinvented the wheel and don't even test the same type / configuration of VM , when you are taken into account the results from other tests for example YABS I contradict you you're looking for all kinds of excuses.
You get from the test:
Uhm, I had NO expectations at all. I simply measured what you provided. Some things I liked, some things - like your disk - were found lacking.
And I did not classify your storage at all in my review. In fact I do not even care. I simply benchmark the drives I get with a VPS.
As for (allegedly contradicting) yabs (and other scripts) I don't care. Simple reason: they, or more precisely their lacking, were the reason why I wrote my benchmark in the first place.
And anyway, I provide reviews to the community that are based on my benchmark. If anyone prefers yabs or whatever benchmarks (s)he is free to ignore mine. Simple.
I have just sent you PM with VPS details.
Thanks, again, for your help with benchmark tests.
Much appreciated
No problem at all. You are welcome.
Literally no-one asked for your benchmarks or opinions shitting on other benchmarks. Make the claims you do; expect them to be challenged.
Which disk I/O is better ?
A or B
Depend on your usage. If you have a lot of small files then disk A is better.
what, using YABS fio to check I/O?
hysterical-laughter.gif
Kindly let me know if there is a better script to benchmark I/O
@jsg let me get this right - you're benchmarking on a rarely used server OS with a flawed understanding of the benchmark operation in Linux - and the benchmark script (YABS) is lacking?
Beside, spouting technical BS and claiming everyone else are idiots is clearly a rational way to deal with criticism. Shows a real grip on the subject and its nuances.
You know distrowatch ranks distros based on page views> @dev_vps said:
"A" for pretty everything. The limiting factor in both is 4k speeds. Sequentials are already awesome in A, in B theyre amazing, but you get these results on VPS because nobody needs that much speed.
4k is a lot more important and thats why they limit it.
Two people running Yabs would saturate sequentials of these drives in raid. Just two. But nobody will need this much speed so they just let it be, because besides benchmarks nobody will hit these speeds. 22MB/s in 4K can be saturated even in Minecraft server with mods and in databases that have a lot of relational queries. If you put Minecraft and databases into one server (hey, 4+ cores!) then good luck xD They will fight for IOPS and Contabo knows this. By limiting 4K IO nobody will use CPU that much so people wont notice that they are heavily oversold.
Kinda funny - in minecraft forums people are complaining that 10 cores from Contabo isnt giving them lag-free experiemce. Then they switch to CHEAPER 2/3/4core Hetzner/BuyVM/Nexusbytes/netcup plan and problems go away
haydenjames/bench-scripts
I appreciate very much the details and feedback you have put in here. I have been windows guy for 20+ years and started using Linux only last year.
A is RackNerd
B is Contabo
Actually, it's six times longer but you're going to officially guesstimate three times.
The disk space is quite a big hit...
(a) Literally wrong. Multiple providers asked for them and @jbiloh asked me to do benchmarks for/on LET/LEB.
(b) Everyone is free to ignore benchmarks and reviews (s)he doesn't like.
(c) Which part of "I've had it with you assholes" did you fail to grasp?
You’re a few months too early for the airing of grievances.
Francisco
Distrowatch is largely useless. It ranks distros based on the number of hits the Distrowatch page gets. The sole fact that MXlinux is #1 and Debian #7 is laughable.