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
HK never had 9TB, it was the odd one out and had 2TB.
I do keep intending to move my company's app backend to those servers as it's distributed and so the more backends the better, but I keep picking up lucrative contract work and so still haven't finished the app they were supposed to be used for. And it's kind of pointless configuring all the backends, because then it's just more stuff to manually fix up every time I update anything.
Happy adding more frontends to my network because they just delegate to the backends, so ironically I'm using all the cheap $7/y servers I buy, but run nothing or almost nothing on the >$3/m VPS!
Ahhh. That's not much different compared to last BF
I guess we're not that different. I prefer horizontal scaling as opposed to vertical scaling out of price concern and redundancies. When I provision the server manually, sometime I forgot terminating it.
I don't understand why a newbie would want to start with freebsd before nearly any Linux distro.
Freebsd is out of the box the slowest distro compared to Linux. You need to be a network engineer who knows wtf they're doing to tweak the shit out of it to get performance out of it.
The very low freebsd install base makes it harder to learn, get help and run popular apps that would make a user want to spend time on it as their daily driver.
Just fucking install vmware workstation on your PC and test it from there if you're that broke.
Maybe I missed where he said this made sense.
No but keep your eyes open and you can get a free one at https://serv00.com when a slot opens up lol
Maybe it doesn't make sense because you just assumed OP is a newbie.
are you ok buddy? everything good at home?
Op seems to have a bunch of vps's from different providers already, so I do not think he is a newbie.
No. It's not a distro and it is by no means slow, not even by default.
FreeBSD's documentation is actually really good, it beats most linux distributions documentation hands down.
And since he is looking for a vps, I highly doubt he will use it as a daily driver.
That is one way, although having a vps with public ip makes more sense when running a server os.
Well, he didn't literally say it so you didn't exactly miss it, you just jumped to some strange conclusions yourself.
And couldn't mount an iso, use netboot-xyz, or any of the half dozen ways to reinstall to any other OS from within the existing install. He could be experienced and just lazy.
I can't say I look at Phoronix regularly, but every single time freebsd is compared, it's generally near the bottom of overall performance.
https://www.phoronix.com/review/freebsd-15-amd-epyc-linux
I generally see freebsd referred to as a distro/distribution.
https://distrowatch.com/table-mobile.php?distribution=freebsd
Doesn't the "D" in BSD stand for distribution?
No argument, I didn't get the vibe he was much of a go getter and genuinely interested in self learning.
The learning curve is higher for freebsd and I'm of the opinion you're not cut out for it by the lack of reading and trying to solve the installation issue on your own without needing a preinstalled template. The install process is the start of the learning process and why I said to install locally.
You even think I'm mental rather than snobby (or similar) despite thinking you're incapable and/or lazy.
(Did not need a template to install and test freebsd. There's this thing called "Google").
@Not_Oles?
OP literally just asked which providers had FreeBSD templates on cheap VPS. From that you jumped to:
There is literally nothing in what OP asked that supports "newbie" or suggests any lack of experience with Linux.
The only thing you can reasonably infer from OP's request is simply a desire to try out FreeBSD from a cheap provider that provides a template rather than having to beg for an ISO to be added.
Ok
Haha, thanks for worrying about me. The truth is, I do know about Linux and all that, but I just want to play around with it a bit. I'm not going to waste time struggling with installations or anything if everything is easily accessible with a click. The future is now, dude.
It's something I'll use for a few months and that's it. Next up, maybe a different topic, nothing to do with FreeBSD, Linux, or servers. That's just me
I like to remember/learn random topics.
so thanks
I've been in the business for almost 40 years and I still ask for advice about providers or places to buy what I want, I don't think anyone would call me a newbie for that.
I cant say that I have ever looked at or even heard of Phoronix before, but comparing ext4 on linux to zfs on BSD, and a stock FreeBSD install against Ubuntu with perf gov? I have probably not missed anything worth the bandwidth to download.
And also, BSD performed better than linux in a lot of those benchmarks, did you even look at them?
On linux sites, yes. They usually do not know better or the formatting of their sites simply does not allow their terminology to be corrected
Yes, Berkeley Software Distribution, and the software they distribute is a complete operating system. This topic has been done to death all over the internet a million times already and I will not have it again on this forum, so if this still confuses you please google it, phrases like "is linux a complete os" or "is BSD a linux distro" should get you all that you need.
I saw a guy asking people with more experience where he could buy a cheap vps for learning about a new operating system. Seems to me that he is genuinely interested, but I guess we see things differently.
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
>
Just look for years, not on the latest that has been out two months. It's consistent. And my whole point was out of the box defaults compared to others. You even talk about tweaking it to make it perform.
I have no idea what Linux would have to do with whether freebsd is a distribution or not. linux is irrelevant to freebsd. It's in the name and operating systems are regularly referred to as "operating system distributions". I think you're having a different argument.
FreeBSD is complete operating system unlike Linux that only-kernel
We've gone quite off course now given that OP was interested in FreeBSD, but anyway...
I always find it funny that GNU folk always try to push GNU first and Linux second, and the kernel guys are just "OK, whatever man, do whatever makes you happy". For the vast majority of people who choose to use Linux, it's the Linux part that makes the difference in their decision - that's what lets them use key technology, like an OS that works, driver support, etc. It's true that for a typical distribution, there's more GNU stuff there than kernel, but that's just because most distributions are bloated. What's interesting is that all that GNU stuff is bloat and it's all optional.
I've personally made embedded systems that just have a kernel, busybox and python. I don't think of that as "oh wow, I made something that isn't GNU", I think of that as just "a Linux system that has most of the bloat removed".
I'm not trying to denigrate the GNU environment. I love GNU tools. I use both cygwin and MINGW64 under Windows for the bulk of my work, other than when I'm using a browser or code editor. But that doesn't make my system GNU/Windows, it's just Windows with some GNU stuff installed on it.
It's a copypasta 😁. Also, systemd has grown out of control, ubuntu has become something like GNU+linux+systemd
Hehe, not having to use systemd is, on its own, one of the best reasons to use FreeBSD!
Has WSL2 made that less of a hassle or switching to WSL2 is more hassle after years of tweaking what works?
please can you help with Invitation code?
I did use it a bit, but it's never become part of my work environment. I can't really remember why now actually. I remember trying (and giving up) on using wireguard with it, but you have to use the Microsoft compiled kernel, so it refuses to work. Although apparently you can compile your own kernels: https://www.reddit.com/r/bashonubuntuonwindows/comments/15y99q6/how_does_wsl2_install_its_own_kernel_into_a/
There's also an older guide for wireguard too, but I guess I didn't find that before (or it didn't work): https://oddinventor.medium.com/installing-wireguard-in-wsl-2-dd676520cb21
I also keep meaning to try out fuse on it, as that'd make some of the local development work I do a bit easier if that works.
One thing I remember from years ago (maybe WSL1) is that the filesystems were kind of separate. If you use a windows "partition" from WSL then strange things can happen (and in particular using git was problematic) and Windows just can't see the Linux "partition" at all because it uses some weird NTFS permissions. I think some of that got fixed as the windows drives are now implemented using the plan9 protocol.
EDIT: oh, i just tried it and remembered a couple more annoying things - you can't get it to start up automatically, so you can't just connect to it with putty. And if you open a manual shell (pretty easy, just windows+r bash) and then connect with putty, if you accidentally close that original shell window it'll take down the whole virtual machine.
Racknerd or Rarecloud
We offer FreeBSD as an OS for setup at C-Servers on the plans in Texas, Coventry, Falkenstein, and soon Helsinki (the VirtFusion-based servers), with RAM and server options and bandwidth speeds for most tastes.
In fact, I've been wanting to implement FreeBSD for quite a long time and been doing some tests since 14.3-RELEASE on our previous platform.
We're also studying on offering OpenBSD and NetBSD standard on all offers for install, as well as distros without systemd that can support cloud-init. They're even more efficient RAM-wise and may suit several use-cases, and given that RAM is currently this expensive...
What? I'm talking about not tweaking it. In most of the benchmark when Ubuntu outperforms FreeBSD it clearly states "Ubuntu Perf Gov", meaning the **Linux* system is tweaked, not FreeBSD.
Also, running FreeBSD on ZFS and benchmarking against Linux on EXT4 is plain stupid. ZFS is built for scalability and robustness, EXT is more "dump the shit to disk as fast as possible". If you want to do a fair comparison, run FreeBSD with UFS2 which is FreeBSD's equivalent to EXT. Both UFS and ZFS are native in FreeBSD so it is not a tweak, it's just a choice during installation.
You called FreeBSD a distro, and I pointed out that that is not the correct term. That's how the argument started. Ubuntu is a distro, Linux is a kernel, FreeBSD is a complete operating system. It's mostly just semantics, yes, but lets get them correct anyway. I would not object if you referred to Linux as an operating system because most people do anyway so who cares, but calling FreeBSD a distribution is not correct and most people hate it.
BSD is an acronym. If they hate it so much, change the D to something else. Arguing it's not what is in the name should have resulted in a name change decades ago.
It sounds like you might have some advice for grasshopper OP for running freebsd on a low end VPS. I believe there's a rule of thumb for how much RAM you need per storage for ZFS, and he's looking for a low end VPS preinstalled from a template which may or may not be the best filesystem for low end use.
I would guess most lowend vps's use the UFS filesystem. As I said, it's just a choice during installation as they are both natively supported.
Well, an operating system is software and they do distribute software, so the acronym is not incorrect. The difference is that in the case of linux distribution is used as a noun, which means a thing, a software distribution, while it in the BSD acronym is used as a verb, something you do, you distribute software.
I've never heard of anyone misunderstanding the acronym like you before so I do not think they will change an acronym that predates the existence of linux with a decade or so just because of that.