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


Shells Virtual Desktop
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Server.net
CPLicense.net
VPS Server
Buy VPN
Vultr
VMs for AI
HostDare
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
InterServer VPS
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Best VPN
High-Performance Bare Metal Server Solutions
Karvl.com
Server Mania Cloud Hosting
DataWagon Hosting
AlphaVPS Hosting
Evoxt.com
Clouvider
VPS Hosting with NVMe
Residential IPs in the US & 4G Mobile Proxies in EU & US with Unlimited Bandwidth
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
Rabisu - Hosting Solutions
Shells Virtual Desktop

Categories

In this Discussion

Home › Offers
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.

[Summer Sale] | VPS 9.99€/yr | 24.99€/yr 3vCPU/6GB/100GB NVME | Xeon Gold

1…1112141617…36

Comments

  • pinky1234pinky1234 Member

    I dont wanna be a pain but my two vps from Registration Date
    Wednesday, November 5th, 2025 Are still pending status. i see new offer added and my two vps are pending . ? i pm giving you hostname.

  • ZurrZurr Member

    Order Number: 1775048138 please add extra bandwith

  • DeepSeeksDeepSeeks Member

    Order Number :6114622133
    Additional 10GB NVMe

  • SomSom Member

    Do you have routed IPv6 /64? I.e. is the prefix routed to my VPS, or just switched?

  • glawksglawks Member

    Order Number: 9085045658
    vCPU or RAM ideally if I can wish!

    Also thanks for the quick response on my ticket, was surprised to get 30min turn around in the middle of the night! Hopefully everything should be fixed swiftly

  • klmnop7788klmnop7788 Member

    Server worked for 12 hours then offline. No support..so asked for refund

  • ChunkserveChunkserve Member, Patron Provider

    @klmnop7788 said:
    Server worked for 12 hours then offline. No support..so asked for refund

    Please provide me support ticket. Should be resolved today! Probably something with deployment

  • misanzhiwumisanzhiwu Member

    @Chunkserve Order ID: 3991366324
    This is my first time purchasing your product. I would like additional vCPUs (if CPUs cannot be allocated, RAM is also acceptable). I hope this can be arranged, please.

  • Nick81Nick81 Member

    Ticket #DKY-820373 no response.vps not provided or not working but says active.I will ask for refund.

  • DDMSDDMS Member

    Server down pls help Ticket ID: YVC-601367

  • nnsccnnscc Member

    Your Order Number is: 2814405702
    vCPU ideally if I can wish!

  • DDMSDDMS Member

    My VPS is not working since morning. No one response to ticket. Disappointed of the service

  • PrmaksPrmaks Member

    @Chunkserve plz
    Order Number: 3583863091
    Double Bandwith thx

  • DDMSDDMS Member

    ChunkServe has completely wasted my time and destroyed my trust. Their service is absolutely unreliable. My VPS worked properly for only 4 days, and after that it became extremely slow, unstable, and now it is almost always down. They still haven’t fixed anything.

    Their technical team has no proper solutions at all. Instead of resolving the issue, they keep asking me what the problem is. This shows how unprofessional and unskilled their support is. The support service is very, very bad — slow, unhelpful, and frustrating to deal with.

    Because of their horrible servers, I lost valuable data and wasted days of work. I strongly advise everyone to stay away from ChunkServe. They are not worth your money or time.

    Thanked by 2yabl0ky amaurobius
  • hohohoho Member 
    root@aadfa:~# fio --name=randread --iodepth=4 --rw=randread --bs=4k --direct=1 --size=1G --numjobs=1
randread: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=4
fio-3.33
Starting 1 process
randread: Laying out IO file (1 file / 1024MiB)
note: both iodepth >= 1 and synchronous I/O engine are selected, queue depth will be capped at 1
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)][99.9%][r=3083KiB/s][r=770 IOPS][eta 00m:01s] 
randread: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=41566: Mon Nov 17 21:46:14 2025
  read: IOPS=388, BW=1555KiB/s (1592kB/s)(1024MiB/674481msec)
    clat (usec): min=74, max=1650.8k, avg=2569.70, stdev=3965.91
     lat (usec): min=74, max=1650.8k, avg=2570.00, stdev=3965.92
    clat percentiles (usec):
     |  1.00th=[  424],  5.00th=[  490], 10.00th=[  537], 20.00th=[  594],
     | 30.00th=[  676], 40.00th=[  955], 50.00th=[ 1827], 60.00th=[ 2704],
     | 70.00th=[ 3458], 80.00th=[ 4686], 90.00th=[ 5604], 95.00th=[ 6587],
     | 99.00th=[ 9765], 99.50th=[10552], 99.90th=[13042], 99.95th=[15270],
     | 99.99th=[18482]
   bw (  KiB/s): min=   88, max= 6880, per=100.00%, avg=1556.40, stdev=571.55, samples=1346
   iops        : min=   22, max= 1720, avg=388.96, stdev=142.91, samples=1346
  lat (usec)   : 100=0.02%, 250=0.03%, 500=5.98%, 750=28.44%, 1000=6.29%
  lat (msec)   : 2=11.04%, 4=22.73%, 10=24.66%, 20=0.80%, 50=0.01%
  lat (msec)   : 100=0.01%, 250=0.01%, 2000=0.01%
  cpu          : usr=0.34%, sys=1.10%, ctx=262188, majf=0, minf=12
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwts: total=262144,0,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=4

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
   READ: bw=1555KiB/s (1592kB/s), 1555KiB/s-1555KiB/s (1592kB/s-1592kB/s), io=1024MiB (1074MB), run=674481-674481msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  vda: ios=262041/1145, merge=0/165, ticks=667472/280345, in_queue=1139443, util=98.55%

    This performance level makes it difficult to run even basic workloads.

    Thanked by 1yabl0ky
  • DDMSDDMS Member

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:04:09 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 22s! [sshd:101741]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:04:37 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 22s! [sshd:101741]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:05:57 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 23s! [sshd:101835]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:11:25 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 22s! [sshd:102023]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:14:17 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 22s! [sshd:102142]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:15:53 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 23s! [sshd:102194]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:15:57 ...
    kernel:Uhhuh. NMI received for unknown reason 30 on CPU 0.

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:15:57 ...
    kernel:Do you have a strange power saving mode enabled?

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:15:57 ...
    kernel:Dazed and confused, but trying to continue

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:16:29 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 22s! [sshd:102221]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:16:57 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 22s! [sshd:102221]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:17:37 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 23s! [sshd:102275]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:18:41 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 22s! [sshd:102384]

    Message from syslogd@vm2 at Nov 17 23:19:09 ...
    kernel:watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#2 stuck for 22s! [sshd:102384]

  • ChunkserveChunkserve Member, Patron Provider

    @DDMS said:
    ChunkServe has completely wasted my time and destroyed my trust. Their service is absolutely unreliable. My VPS worked properly for only 4 days, and after that it became extremely slow, unstable, and now it is almost always down. They still haven’t fixed anything.

    Their technical team has no proper solutions at all. Instead of resolving the issue, they keep asking me what the problem is. This shows how unprofessional and unskilled their support is. The support service is very, very bad — slow, unhelpful, and frustrating to deal with.

    Because of their horrible servers, I lost valuable data and wasted days of work. I strongly advise everyone to stay away from ChunkServe. They are not worth your money or time.

    Dear DDMS,
    Thank you for the feedback. You created a ticket in the morning and got a reply later that day, where we asked for more information - needed a clarification about the issue. I see issue with one disk on the node9, we're in process of troubleshoting it and implementing fix - the IO levels may be unacceptable - also related to @hoho message. We will add additional 2 weeks to the server. I'll keep you updated in this case - I'm really sorry for that.

  • ChunkserveChunkserve Member, Patron Provider

    Okay,
    We're spinning second node on proprity, and moving the affected VMs, after that, the node09 will be investigated closer.

  • ChunkserveChunkserve Member, Patron Provider

    @hoho said:

    root@aadfa:~# fio --name=randread --iodepth=4 --rw=randread --bs=4k --direct=1 --size=1G --numjobs=1
randread: (g=0): rw=randread, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096B-4096B, ioengine=psync, iodepth=4
fio-3.33
Starting 1 process
randread: Laying out IO file (1 file / 1024MiB)
note: both iodepth >= 1 and synchronous I/O engine are selected, queue depth will be capped at 1
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [r(1)][99.9%][r=3083KiB/s][r=770 IOPS][eta 00m:01s] 
randread: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=41566: Mon Nov 17 21:46:14 2025
  read: IOPS=388, BW=1555KiB/s (1592kB/s)(1024MiB/674481msec)
    clat (usec): min=74, max=1650.8k, avg=2569.70, stdev=3965.91
     lat (usec): min=74, max=1650.8k, avg=2570.00, stdev=3965.92
    clat percentiles (usec):
     |  1.00th=[  424],  5.00th=[  490], 10.00th=[  537], 20.00th=[  594],
     | 30.00th=[  676], 40.00th=[  955], 50.00th=[ 1827], 60.00th=[ 2704],
     | 70.00th=[ 3458], 80.00th=[ 4686], 90.00th=[ 5604], 95.00th=[ 6587],
     | 99.00th=[ 9765], 99.50th=[10552], 99.90th=[13042], 99.95th=[15270],
     | 99.99th=[18482]
   bw (  KiB/s): min=   88, max= 6880, per=100.00%, avg=1556.40, stdev=571.55, samples=1346
   iops        : min=   22, max= 1720, avg=388.96, stdev=142.91, samples=1346
  lat (usec)   : 100=0.02%, 250=0.03%, 500=5.98%, 750=28.44%, 1000=6.29%
  lat (msec)   : 2=11.04%, 4=22.73%, 10=24.66%, 20=0.80%, 50=0.01%
  lat (msec)   : 100=0.01%, 250=0.01%, 2000=0.01%
  cpu          : usr=0.34%, sys=1.10%, ctx=262188, majf=0, minf=12
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwts: total=262144,0,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=4

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
   READ: bw=1555KiB/s (1592kB/s), 1555KiB/s-1555KiB/s (1592kB/s-1592kB/s), io=1024MiB (1074MB), run=674481-674481msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  vda: ios=262041/1145, merge=0/165, ticks=667472/280345, in_queue=1139443, util=98.55%

    This performance level makes it difficult to run even basic workloads.

    DM'd you!

  • PrmaksPrmaks Member

    I advise you not to mess with this hoster. The server worked fine for a couple of days, then there were constant disconnections and a wild processor delay, as if I had 0.1 vcpu. iowait 40%!!! It's a horror, not a server. They're in no hurry to fix it. They also didn't increase the bandwidth after I reported it here.

    Thanked by 2yabl0ky amaurobius
  • JohnFilch123JohnFilch123 Member

    @Prmaks said: It's a horror

    Boo 👻

    Thanked by 1JohnnySac
  • sawagunasawaguna Member

    @Prmaks said:
    I advise you not to mess with this hoster. The server worked fine for a couple of days, then there were constant disconnections and a wild processor delay, as if I had 0.1 vcpu. iowait 40%!!! It's a horror, not a server. They're in no hurry to fix it. They also didn't increase the bandwidth after I reported it here.

    yeah, same here.
    Couldn't even SSH to the servers yesterday.

    And as soon as I do anything on the servers, it gets incredibly slow and they just hangs.
    Clearly don't have access to the ressources I'm supposed to have.
    Not even close.

    Complete waste of time and money.

    I just keep them in idle as it's just not usable.

    And don't even bother with support, you won't get any from them.

    Thanked by 1yabl0ky
  • ChunkserveChunkserve Member, Patron Provider

    @Prmaks said:
    I advise you not to mess with this hoster. The server worked fine for a couple of days, then there were constant disconnections and a wild processor delay, as if I had 0.1 vcpu. iowait 40%!!! It's a horror, not a server. They're in no hurry to fix it. They also didn't increase the bandwidth after I reported it here.

    Did you create a ticket? Currently we do not see any new regarding the issue. I informed about problems with one node (announcements). It is an array fail and we are getting a new node to live migrate the VMs. It will be done today. After that, we’re fixing the current node and falling back the servers. It is not true that we are not in hurry to fix.

  • ChunkserveChunkserve Member, Patron Provider

    @sawaguna said:

    @Prmaks said:
    I advise you not to mess with this hoster. The server worked fine for a couple of days, then there were constant disconnections and a wild processor delay, as if I had 0.1 vcpu. iowait 40%!!! It's a horror, not a server. They're in no hurry to fix it. They also didn't increase the bandwidth after I reported it here.

    yeah, same here.
    Couldn't even SSH to the servers yesterday.

    And as soon as I do anything on the servers, it gets incredibly slow and they just hangs.
    Clearly don't have access to the ressources I'm supposed to have.
    Not even close.

    Complete waste of time and money.

    I just keep them in idle as it's just not usable.

    And don't even bother with support, you won't get any from them.

    Same as upper, node09? We will update the process in WHMCS announcement/network issue tab.

  • ChunkserveChunkserve Member, Patron Provider

    I started the migration, after that fixing node09 and moving back servers. Information on WHMCS updated. If someone have any issues, pelase raise a ticket - so we can compensate for the problem and provide regular updates.

  • lowendboylowendboy Member

    Hey @Chunkserve , I've posted this here about the free upgrade 2 days ago, can you do it when you get a minute? "Order Number is:
    5800586402", can you add either RAM or 1 Month free? Thank you in advanced!

  • PrmaksPrmaks Member

    @Chunkserve said:
    I started the migration, after that fixing node09 and moving back servers. Information on WHMCS updated. If someone have any issues, pelase raise a ticket - so we can compensate for the problem and provide regular updates.

    Fixed it, thanks.
    And what about the request "@Chunkserve plz
    Order Number: 3583863091
    Double Bandwith thx"

  • pinky1234pinky1234 Member

    Ticket #NDJ-833888 - VPS Server

    2 Vps Order pending since November 5,2025 + One VPs down.

  • RweeenRweeen Member

    If u r planning to buy this vps u should know uptime is like 80%. Server is running whenever its feel like it. Im tired of tickets!

  • ChunkserveChunkserve Member, Patron Provider

    @Rweeen said:
    If u r planning to buy this vps u should know uptime is like 80%. Server is running whenever its feel like it. Im tired of tickets!

    Hey, everything is fine for now. As per the status, we are moving back vms to the node09. We tested it yesterday with couple of customers and it Works fine :)

Sign In or Register to comment.