Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In with OpenID
Advertise on LowEndTalk.com

In this Discussion

DigitalOcean vs Linode vs Vultr

DigitalOcean vs Linode vs Vultr

Hi,

I just got the below machine from the above mentioned host

1) DigitalOcean

VPS Type : kvm CPU type : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2650L v3 @ 1.80GHz Number of cores : 4 CPU frequency : 1799.998 MHz RAM : 7823 MB Swap : MB I/O speed : 678MB/s

2) Linode

VPS Type : kvm CPU type : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v3 @ 2.50GHz Number of cores : 6 CPU frequency : 2499.996 MHz RAM : 12012 MB Swap : MB I/O speed : 642MB/s

3) Vultr

VPS Type : kvm CPU type : Virtual CPU a7769a6388d5 Number of cores : 6 CPU frequency : 2399.996 MHz RAM : 7822 MB Swap : MB I/O speed : 288MB/s

And also I have ran the benchmarks

Left - Linode Right - DigitalOcean Middle - Vultr

CPU - http://prnt.sc/dcxds6 Memory Read - http://prnt.sc/dcxg9a Memory Write - http://prnt.sc/dcxhic IO - http://prnt.sc/dcxixt DB - http://prnt.sc/dcxqaa

Can you please tell me based on the CPU and Benchmark which is good to go with ?

And there is a chance I may be getting the below specs too

VPS Type : kvm CPU type : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2697 v4 @ 2.30GHz Number of cores : 6 CPU frequency : 2299.996 MHz RAM : 12012 MB

DigitalOcean vs Linode vs Vultr
  1. Which one to go with ?107 votes
    1. DigitalOcean
      22.43%
    2. Linode
      34.58%
    3. Vultr
      28.97%
    4. Newer CPU
      14.02%
Thanked by 1Plioser
«1

Comments

  • Ok, wait a minute while the community comes back since they are all in an order queue purchasing cheap VPS deadpooling a few.

    Thanked by 1elgs
  • voted Vultr as I'm using their entry-level instance over DO but I honestly think you should shop around carefully before you commit $80 /mo on any of these three providers ..

    Thanked by 1opsflops
  • @imgmoney said: Can you please tell me based on the CPU and Benchmark which is good to go with ?

    Generally higher = better. Then again the benchmarks are completely meaningless unless they are measuring what you plan to do with said box(es).

  • jarjar Provider

    To be honest all of these look so close to each other that I see no clear path to pick one over the other based on those screenshots. I'd say go with who you like based on other factors then. Price and support, perhaps.

    Voted DO though because, well, reasons :P

  • If the network speed and ping is important for you, then try test it?

  • didn't even looked the specs, hitted that DO radio button and clicked submit.

  • I stayed with Linode for some years chiefly because their support is usually nice. You can max out the CPU usage without being chased by sysadmins. DO and vultr are also pretty stable, but I would not put important stuff on it because, you know, reasons.

  • DO. Vultr had weird TOS/AUP terms relatively recently (there are posts that can be found in LET/WHT archives, with samples).

    However, to those who don't care about "fine print" and possible privacy/etc problems, Vultr offers more features than DO and definitely surpasses it in some aspects.

    Personally, I choose DO and will stay well clear of Vultr. JMNSHO.

    Monitor your network assets with IPHost (PM me for discount code)
  • DO is premium stuff. Rarely fail and support is fast. I like how stable the VMs are. Stability is prime.

    Also their documentation DO come handy.

    Thanked by 1inthecloudblog
  • ihadpihadp Member
    edited November 2016

    @Hxxx said: DO is premium stuff. Rarely fail and support is fast. I like how stable the VMs are. Stability is prime.

    Also their documentation DO come handy.

    Fast Support? Their Support is damn slow, at least by my standards...I have opened a few tickets and depending on the time of day it takes them hours.

    www.whatuptime.com
    Microsoft Windows Templates for Online.net, Kimsufi, DigitalOcean, OVH, Vultr & Much More!

  • jarjar Provider
    edited November 2016

    IHaveADarkPassenger said: Fast Support? Their Support is damn slow, at least by my standards...I have opened a few tickets and depending on the time of day it takes them hours.

    Working on it :(

    Worth noting though that it's still fast by the standard of other self-managed providers at that price point with more than a few thousand customers. Perspective is important. But that doesn't mean it isn't something to work on. Just important that the comparisons are not hosts that haven't met scale or managed providers.

    Providing support is easy. Providing support at scale is a different task. Keeping support amazing as we grow, that's part of my job :)

  • Waldo19Waldo19 Member
    edited November 2016

    You do know that those host aren't "True" cloud providers, imho. Ask them what raid they use, how many HD's data is being written on.

  • I love Linode, stable and much features :D

    Gapps legacy 100/200 users cheap 4 sale. PM

  • jarjar Provider
    edited November 2016

    @Waldo19 said: You do know that those host aren't "True" cloud providers, imho. Ask them what raid they use, how many HD's data is being written on.

    How many HDs makes one "true" cloud?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing
    http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-145.pdf

    (FYI, this is the definition hosts are using when they say cloud, so if your definition varies, you cannot be an informed buyer, and your expectation should not be used to educate buyers or you will be teaching them to shop without proper expectations)

  • @jarland said:

    @Waldo19 said: You do know that those host aren't "True" cloud providers, imho. Ask them what raid they use, how many HD's data is being written on.

    How many HDs makes one "true" cloud?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing
    http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-145.pdf

    Another day, another thread brother. When I have the energy we can see who has more inches. :P

    Everyone defines cloud differently and I can argue both sides but IMHO, they aren't true cloud providers.

  • jarjar Provider
    edited November 2016

    Waldo19 said: Everyone defines cloud differently

    Not the hosts, not the people writing about it in tech articles. If people selling cloud mean it to be one thing and you teach others that it means another, you are misinforming people and creating in them expectations that will cause them to purchase services with the expectation that they are buying something else. If people buy from a cloud provider and expect something else it's because of people misinforming them, not because of false advertising.

    Waldo19 said: When I have the energy we can see who has more inches

    It's not about inches. It's about using not misusing your knowledge to mislead consumers just because you want the market to accept a different norm. It may very well please you to know that a few people sign up for cloud providers and complain because they've been misinformed, but it does not please me.

    Thanked by 1PepeSilvia
  • why not ramnode or dediserve?

    Thanked by 1dediserve
  • @jarland said:

    Waldo19 said: Everyone defines cloud differently

    Not the hosts, not the people writing about it in tech articles. If people selling cloud mean it to be one thing and you teach others that it means another, you are misinforming people and creating in them expectations that will cause them to purchase services with the expectation that they are buying something else. If people buy from a cloud provider and expect something else it's because of people misinforming them, not because of false advertising.

    Waldo19 said: When I have the energy we can see who has more inches

    It's not about inches. It's about using not misusing your knowledge to mislead consumers just because you want the market to accept a different norm.

    Really? The people selling Cloud services can't even agree on what true Cloud is! I stated an opinion and for whats its worth even included "IMHO". This is a public form and every thread is half full of opinions. I just stated a popular opinion amongst many in our hosting communities/circles.

    You aren't a true cloud provider in my book unless you have: Failover Setup/Clustered Storage Architecture/High Redundancy

    Having cloud like billing doesn't make you a true cloud, imho. (Hourly billing, scalability, etc)

  • jarjar Provider
    edited November 2016

    Waldo19 said: I stated an opinion

    Agreed. I just followed up with fact to ensure that any readers are well informed and have proper expectations. Because I care about potential customers of the entire industry, not just my own, and have no desire to see people misled in an effort to attempt to coerce market changes.

  • @jarland Random thoughts - I've always felt DO should run their own DNS recursion platform for their infrastructure to rely on. Linode do it, Vultr do it, I hate having to rely on Google.

  • jarjar Provider

    @kcaj said: @jarland Random thoughts - I've always felt DO should run their own DNS recursion platform for their infrastructure to rely on. Linode do it, Vultr do it, I hate having to rely on Google.

    I agree. That would be great. I've heard so many stories in the last year of Google rate limiting IP ranges, relying on their free resolvers does not seem like a solid end game for anyone.

    Thanked by 2kcaj inthecloudblog
  • Do you have IOPS benchmark?

  • @jarland said:

    Waldo19 said: I stated an opinion

    Agreed. I just followed up with fact to ensure that any readers are well informed and have proper expectations. Because I care about potential customers of the entire industry, not just my own, and have no desire to see people misled in an effort to attempt to coerce market changes.

    I'm not sure what facts your presented and I can find plenty online to support my case but users here can do their own research and judge for themselves based on their needs. In all honesty I think you or anyone else is misleading ppl if you think the above mentioned companies are "True Cloud" providers. Honestly surprised to hear it coming from you since many in the industry above my pay grade and expertise level disagree with you.

    We can agree to disagree. I was hesitant to even reply because this debate is waged every few months on various boards and sites but and no one wins but just as you felt it your responsibility to reply to my post and correct me, I felt the same towards you.

    Let our posts be a springboard for future clients of Cloud services to research and decide for themselves if companies advertising themselves as cloud servers are really cloud.

  • jarjar Provider
    edited November 2016

    Waldo19 said: I'm not sure what facts your presented

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing
    http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-145.pdf
    https://www.ibm.com/cloud-computing/learn-more/what-is-a-cloud-server

    I'm actually not sure what facts you presented. I'm not mad at you or anything, I do this for the readers. It saddens me every time I have to correct someone's expectation that was grounded not in the facts of what cloud providers sell and advertise, but the rumors that people spread on internet forums.

    I care, so I inform. That is all there is to it.

    Waldo19 said: I think you or anyone else is misleading ppl if you think the above mentioned companies are "True Cloud" providers

    I think you base that on forum conversation and not documented or scholarly information. I know that I base mine on documented scholarly information. You'll see why I have trouble seeing it from that perspective.

    If everyone sells a yellow beach ball and you go around telling everyone that true beachballs are white, you are the reason that people are misinformed when they write a review on Amazon saying "Not a true beach ball, false advertising, stupid thing was yellow." If you're comfortable with that responsibility, that's not my concern I suppose. I, however, retain the right to step in to those forums and say "Actually, beach ball does not imply the color white."

    I've done nothing to set those other expectations, and I do not wish to sell someone something that they believe is something else. Surely you would agree the desire to not get sales from misinformed customers is at least common decency. If others are setting different expectations on my behalf, I feel obligated to speak up. This in addition to the fact that I simply care about this industry as a whole, and informing buyers who wish to jump into this industry is important to me. I wouldn't want them buying from Amazon with the wrong expectation of cloud, assuming that a basic EC2 instance is distributed, any more than I would want them assuming it of a droplet.

  • Waldo19 said: I'm not sure what facts your presented

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing
    http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-145.pdf

    I'm actually not sure what facts you presented. I'm not mad at you or anything, I do this for the readers. It saddens me every time I have to correct someone's expectation that was grounded not in the facts of what cloud providers sell and advertise, but the rumors that people spread on internet forums.

    I care, so I inform. That is all there is to it.

    Waldo19 said: I think you or anyone else is misleading ppl if you think the above mentioned companies are "True Cloud" providers

    I think you base that on forum conversation and not documented or scholarly information. I know that I base mine on documented scholarly information. You'll see why I have trouble seeing it from that perspective.

    If everyone sells a yellow beachball and you go around telling everyone that true beachballs are white, you are the reason that people are misinformed when they write a review on Amazon saying "Not a true beachball, false advertising, stupid thing was yellow." If you're comfortable with that responsibility, that's not my concern I suppose. I, however, retain the right to step in to those forums and say "Actually, beachball does not imply the color white."

    Our stances on this matter are documented in this thread for future readers. I am not trying to debate you or engage in some online nerd, I.T. spar. I felt inclined to offer an opinion and I did.

    Thanked by 1jar
  • eva2000eva2000 Member
    edited November 2016

    Benchmarked then all and Linode wins especially now that majority of Vultr VPS are the lower clocked 2.4Ghz and not the 3.4+ Ghz ones so closer to the lower DO cpu performance.

    some are older Linode XEN benchmarks back then so Linode KVM instances these days would be even faster

    imgmoney said: VPS Type : kvm CPU type : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2697 v4 @ 2.30GHz Number of cores : 6 CPU frequency : 2299.996 MHz RAM : 12012 MB

    Newer cpu but not necessarily faster due to lower clock speed than Linode's E5-2680v3 at 2.5Ghz - depends on your work loads i.e. for encryption/decryption and https/ssl (especially for ECC 256bit ECDSA based SSL certificates), the E5-2697v4 might be faster or around the same as Linode E5-2680v3 just due to the difference in clock speeds of 2.3Ghz vs 2.5Ghz. E5 v4 would be faster clock for clock for encryption/decryption especially AES-NI based but the lower clock speed just might even things out compared to E5-2680v3.

    Linode is also expanding it's network https://blog.linode.com/2016/11/02/network-update-multihomed-increased-transit-peering/.

    FYI, I currently have VPS with Linode, Vultr and DigitalOcean :)

    * Centmin Mod Project (HTTP/2 support + ngx_pagespeed + Nginx Lua + Vhost Stats)
    * Centmin Mod LEMP Stack Quick Install Guide
    Thanked by 1Umair
  • HalfEatenPieHalfEatenPie Member
    edited November 2016

    @Waldo19 said:

    Waldo19 said: I'm not sure what facts your presented

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing
    http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-145.pdf

    I'm actually not sure what facts you presented. I'm not mad at you or anything, I do this for the readers. It saddens me every time I have to correct someone's expectation that was grounded not in the facts of what cloud providers sell and advertise, but the rumors that people spread on internet forums.

    I care, so I inform. That is all there is to it.

    Waldo19 said: I think you or anyone else is misleading ppl if you think the above mentioned companies are "True Cloud" providers

    I think you base that on forum conversation and not documented or scholarly information. I know that I base mine on documented scholarly information. You'll see why I have trouble seeing it from that perspective.

    If everyone sells a yellow beachball and you go around telling everyone that true beachballs are white, you are the reason that people are misinformed when they write a review on Amazon saying "Not a true beachball, false advertising, stupid thing was yellow." If you're comfortable with that responsibility, that's not my concern I suppose. I, however, retain the right to step in to those forums and say "Actually, beachball does not imply the color white."

    Our stances on this matter are documented in this thread for future readers. I am not trying to debate you or engage in some online nerd, I.T. spar. I felt inclined to offer an opinion and I did.

    Just to point. This is not a grey area. It's defined within the National Institute of Standards and Technology, part of the US Department of Commerce. While definitions of words can change over time, the definition outlined by @jarland is currently the official accepted definition. Now you can say you define it differently sure, however issues could come up later during discussions. It's like saying climate change is just an opinion and you disagree with it. There will be people who agree with you, but when most of the scientific community have agreed upon the commonly accepted definition, saying otherwise could potentially be dangerous to those who are misinformed expecting more (and in the end, is absurd).

    Many of the research labs I've worked with have accepted that the definition of cloud computing is what it is. Just using a server that's offsite connected through the internet. Now most universities do have their own computing clusters and hosting infrastructure so questions like "should we use AWS/Azure/GCP/DO?" isn't that common, but those situations do come up and while they don't expect their data to disappear one night, they accept that this is a risk.

    Redundant data storage, while originally more traditional in earlier platforms, aren't necessarily a requirement to be defined as a cloud.

    Note, other people can say "well that's just the US's official definition of the term" and they'll be correct (I haven't checked with any other local government's definitions). However, even in academia, many countries and researchers use the definitions outlined by the United States or Europe to provide the foundation for their own policies and regulations. It doesn't directly impact it, but rather indirectly influence that country's definition.

    Use whatever definition you wish, but please be aware that there are standards to definitions. Misinforming readers who may not be well versed in these terminology could be very dangerous and could expose those users to risk they do not want to accept.

    Edit: Those who believe "true cloud" as being something with high availability and redundancy, please quit being delusional. As a proper professional, communication is important in this industry and definitions are critical. Please do your research, but realize that most people who believe cloud includes high availability and redundancy don't have proper background in this technology or are mostly affiliated with some obscure entity. There's a reason NIST had to get involved in this matter. Having redundancy and high availability may be a feature involved (including clustering), but they are not de-facto of cloud hosting or computing.

    P.S. This isn't an inches measuring contest. Nor is it a contest to begin with. It's a clarification of a definition.

    And that's my post on here for the rest of the year.

    Catalyst Host - Pie Approved!
    Thanked by 2Master_Bo jar
  • @jarland said:

    @kcaj said: @jarland Random thoughts - I've always felt DO should run their own DNS recursion platform for their infrastructure to rely on. Linode do it, Vultr do it, I hate having to rely on Google.

    I agree. That would be great. I've heard so many stories in the last year of Google rate limiting IP ranges, relying on their free resolvers does not seem like a solid end game for anyone.

    Some DNS-based blacklist also rate limit using the recursive DNS resolver, if that gives DO another incentive :) . Back when I was using DO for my email server I had to switch to HE.net's public DNS.

  • imgmoneyimgmoney Member
    edited November 2016

    As the above benchmark has nothing to do with this post , but i want to share this stuff.

    There is major performance increase in my website since I have switched from easyengine to VPSSIM

    @eva2000 I decided to move away from easyengine and decided to give a try with VPSSIM and Centminmod , Installed both. But moved away with VPSSIM , since I don't know how to access your interface after installation. Is there any good guide for newbies ?

    I have tried out easyengine and VPSSIM , VPSSIM is best with much option. I will be trying out Centminmod tonight

    Thanks for all the contribution you people have made till now. And the Vultr is leading according to poll.

  • JunklessJunkless Member
    edited November 2016

    @imgmoney said: As the above benchmark has nothing to do with this post , but i want to share this stuff.

    There is major performance increase in my website since I have switched from easyengine to VPSSIM

    @eva2000 I decided to move away from easyengine and decided to give a try with VPSSIM and Centminmod , Installed both. But moved away with VPSSIM , since I don't know how to access your interface after installation. Is there any good guide for newbies ?

    I have tried out easyengine and VPSSIM , VPSSIM is best with much option. I will be trying out Centminmod tonight

    Thanks for all the contribution you people have made till now. And the Vultr is leading according to poll.

    cd /usr/local/src/centminmod 
    ./centmin.sh
    

    Done.

  • eva2000eva2000 Member
    edited November 2016

    imgmoney said: @eva2000 I decided to move away from easyengine and decided to give a try with VPSSIM and Centminmod , Installed both. But moved away with VPSSIM , since I don't know how to access your interface after installation. Is there any good guide for newbies ?

    centmin.sh menu access like @Junkless listed is outlined at https://centminmod.com/menu.html

    Check out the Centmin Mod LEMP Install Guide for full details. After install, check out the next steps in the Getting Started Guide and FAQ

    And pop up by the forums where all the juicy stuff is https://community.centminmod.com/ :D

    Recommend you check out Centmin Mod 123.09beta01 https://centminmod.com/changelog.html :)

    * Centmin Mod Project (HTTP/2 support + ngx_pagespeed + Nginx Lua + Vhost Stats)
    * Centmin Mod LEMP Stack Quick Install Guide
  • Junkless said: cd /usr/local/src/centminmod ./centmin.sh

    Thanks, This really helps out.

    @eva2000 you really need to edit your install guide or next step guide to add the above lines since centmin.sh can be find in /usr/local/src/centminmod

    It will help many newbies like me :) or you can change the way of invoking the menu like vpssim do.

    Typing CENTMINMOD invoking the menu will do much better.

  • eva2000eva2000 Member
    edited November 2016

    you can type = centmin to invoke menu after first initial install's exit of SSH session too

    will update the guide https://centminmod.com/menu.html and https://centminmod.com/install.html

    * Centmin Mod Project (HTTP/2 support + ngx_pagespeed + Nginx Lua + Vhost Stats)
    * Centmin Mod LEMP Stack Quick Install Guide
  • Just curious - why aren't you considering a dedi?

    Seconding @mik997 (based on the $80/mo) that it makes more sense to shop around and pick up a significantly better dedi for the same price if you're going to be running this pretty much continuously on a monthly basis (unless of course you have some very stringent location/latency requirements in which case again, I'm curious to know how consistent these cloud services are as compared to a consistenty-worse-latency dedi).

    Thanks.

    Thanked by 1mik997
  • have Do and Vultr for a long time, voting for Do.

  • PepeSilviaPepeSilvia Member
    edited November 2016

    Never tried Linode. DO is rather slow nowadays for the price. Both Vultr and DO have excellent network and availability.

    I'm grandfathered on to a 3.6Ghz CPU at Vultr that they no longer offer

    processor       : 0
    vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
    cpu family      : 6
    model           : 60
    model name      : Virtual CPU e7da7129d3ee
    stepping        : 1
    microcode       : 0x1
    cpu MHz         : 3600.008
    cache size      : 4096 KB
    physical id     : 0
    siblings        : 1
    core id         : 0
    cpu cores       : 1
    apicid          : 0
    initial apicid  : 0
    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 syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc rep_good nopl eagerfpu pni pclmulqdq ssse3 fma cx16 pcid sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand hypervisor lahf_lm abm arat xsaveopt fsgsbase bmi1 avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid
    bogomips        : 7200.01
    clflush size    : 64
    cache_alignment : 64
    address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
    power management:
    

    Powered by CrapNAT™

  • Waldo19Waldo19 Member
    edited November 2016

    @HalfEatenPie said: Just to point. This is not a grey area. It's defined within the National Institute of Standards and Technology, part of the US Department of Commerce. While definitions of words can change over time, the definition outlined by @jarland is currently the official accepted definition. Now you can say you define it differently sure, however issues could come up later during discussions. It's like saying climate change is just an opinion and you disagree with it. There will be people who agree with you, but when most of the scientific community have agreed upon the commonly accepted definition, saying otherwise could potentially be dangerous to those who are misinformed expecting more (and in the end, is absurd).

    Many of the research labs I've worked with have accepted that the definition of cloud computing is what it is. Just using a server that's offsite connected through the internet. Now most universities do have their own computing clusters and hosting infrastructure so questions like "should we use AWS/Azure/GCP/DO?" isn't that common, but those situations do come up and while they don't expect their data to disappear one night, they accept that this is a risk.

    Redundant data storage, while originally more traditional in earlier platforms, aren't necessarily a requirement to be defined as a cloud.

    Note, other people can say "well that's just the US's official definition of the term" and they'll be correct (I haven't checked with any other local government's definitions). However, even in academia, many countries and researchers use the definitions outlined by the United States or Europe to provide the foundation for their own policies and regulations. It doesn't directly impact it, but rather indirectly influence that country's definition.

    Use whatever definition you wish, but please be aware that there are standards to definitions. Misinforming readers who may not be well versed in these terminology could be very dangerous and could expose those users to risk they do not want to accept.

    Edit: Those who believe "true cloud" as being something with high availability and redundancy, please quit being delusional. As a proper professional, communication is important in this industry and definitions are critical. Please do your research, but realize that most people who believe cloud includes high availability and redundancy don't have proper background in this technology or are mostly affiliated with some obscure entity. There's a reason NIST had to get involved in this matter. Having redundancy and high availability may be a feature involved (including clustering), but they are not de-facto of cloud hosting or computing.

    P.S. This isn't an inches measuring contest. Nor is it a contest to begin with. It's a clarification of a definition.

    And that's my post on here for the rest of the year.

    Im confident your contribution to this thread is appreciated to some but I must be as you put it.... delusional and regardless of how whomever defines cloud it isn't true cloud to me unless it has HA and redundancy. Its simply hosting thats easily scalable.

    As you mentioned earlier Cloud Computing in layman terms per the "accepted" definition is "just using a server that's offsite connected through the internet". So companies play on peoples ignorance and as you put it their delusion. Thats just wrong brother. When the average Joe hears the word "Cloud" certain connotations are ingrained and embedded in the majority of us. We think our data is safe and theres some form of redundancy. True, thats the consumers fault for not doing their due diligence but the average person using these services are not scholars or have the expertise and experience you and @jarland may have.

    None of the companies advertising Cloud on their websites address the common misconceptions associated with the term. Where is the consumer market education? Why aren't the Cloud Giants attempting to reeducate us, since a lot of folks define Cloud differently. For the life of me how did OVH sell Cloud instances with a single HD in good conscious? They hid behind some definition and even though that may be the law of the land at present... It doesn't make it right, in my book.

    Neither here nor there and apples and oranges but just because of sentencing guidelines some people are getting 10 years-life for less than 2 grams of marijuana. The laws and facts say habitual offenders must be sentenced under certain guidelines. Is it right that people are doing 15+ years for two marijuana joints? I would hope you'd say no. However, the facts are the facts. And thats my point.... The fact may very well be that "X" is the accepted definition of Cloud and thats what a lot of companies are running with but when you know for a fact that most people don't travel the same circles, read the same periodicals, work in the same facilities or were educated at the same places wouldn't you feel the need to educate your customers on exactly what you're selling and help reeducate them on popular misconceptions?

    Playing on peoples ignorance is just morally wrong in my book... But then again morals are subjective and if we went by morals then anything would be permitted. If we truly cared about the customer, consumer, reader, etc... We'd reeducate them on exactly what a service is and isn't.

    Excuse the redundancy(no pun intended) but I respectfully disagree to the true fact of how cloud is defined per you, jarland and the links provided. For those who have accepted the Cloud Definition as proposed in this thread, thats fine. I'll fight for your right to have that stance, although I disagree. Thats what makes most countries great. The freedom of speech.

  • The only true cloud hosting

    Thanked by 1Waldo19
  • HalfEatenPieHalfEatenPie Member
    edited November 2016

    Well, crap, this became a long post. Prepare your butts. Also I broke my "this is my last post here for 2016" promise but meh, such is life. Disappointing.

    Early warning: This is related to definition of cloud discussion that's going on in the side. Feel free to skip if you're not interested.

    @Waldo19 said:

    You're making assumptions related to the base infrastructure. Again, just because such infrastructure is popular and common does not make the definition so. This is why people usually advertise "Cloud Server!" with "Raid 10" (not that Raid 10 means full redundancy) or "SAN Cluster" or some other form. You're taking the word and applying your assumption and expectations to it as if it was the true common definition of the word. You have to release this belief.

    This has nothing to do with being silenced. This has nothing to do with infringing on rights. This has to do with the base definition of the term, of which you have an incorrect understanding and yet claim is the correct definition and is debatable.

    I'm not trying to be rude, but making these assumptions related to cloud and dispersing it to other people is an easy and dangerous way to spread misinformation. This isn't a "you and I define cloud differently", this is a "cloud is defined as this" moment.

    Redundancy is a very different concept that is commonly present with "Cloud" in certain fields. This is because people recognize "cloud" as an automated approach. Cloud is on-demand provisioning of services without needing human interaction with resource pooling availability. This is defined and outlined in the NIST document. (Source: http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-145.pdf )

    Cloud is focused on on-demand resource pooling and scalability with automation. IBM defined it as such in their documentation here: https://www.ibm.com/cloud-computing/learn-more/what-is-a-cloud-server. There is no mentions of redundancy except for the fact that you have data off-site, meaning if your office catches on fire well you have data saved in a location off-site so you're fine. IBM also defines cloud services as being an automated service (again similar to NIST's definition) with on-demand resources and a heavy focus on scalability.

    IBM also has an article related to cloud storage here: https://www.ibm.com/cloud-computing/learn-more/what-is-cloud-storage/ . In no way do they state that cloud storage as a redundancy measure, except again protection against on-site disasters. Cloud storage is simply defined as remote storage solutions with scalability.

    Interoute, Europe's largest cloud services platform, has an article related to Cloud Hosting here: http://www.interoute.com/what-cloud-hosting (if the hotlinking doesn't work). Notice how they do mention redundancy, but in relation to a computational node going down regarding the resources. No definition is stated regarding data integrity and redundancy. Redundancy here is mostly discussed related to the data being on a NAS setup where the VM data is stored and mounted to the VM running on a computational node in the cluster. NAS itself does not mean data redundancy as it's defined as "Network Attached Storage". You can have raid 0 NFS and it'd still count as NAS.

    HowStuffWorks.com even recognizes the difference between redundancy and cloud storage or cloud services in this article here: http://computer.howstuffworks.com/cloud-computing/cloud-storage1.htm.

    The definition of cloud hasn't actually changed at all. Cloud systems are supposed to be easy and automatic provisioning from a "pool of resources". Now top-tier cloud service providers like AWS and Google usually go with the NAS approach and have computational clusters. Now that would be computational redundancy (one computational node goes down, the network storage would attach to a different computational node and spin the VM back up). But the true final definition is scalability, resource pooling, and "utility" pricing.

    I want to say some people misunderstood this entire concept and assumed cloud included data redundancy or full on redundancy because of how "top tier" services like Google does it.

    You say it's unethical for companies to play off this misconception. However, many people understand this concept and accept these concepts and risks. I've only met a hand full of individuals who believed cloud included redundancy, hell I used to be one for a while. It's not the provider's job to make sure you understand everything. It's their job to provide you with opportunities and resources you need. Education isn't their job, this is why there are teachers and professors to begin with. It is your job as an individual who wants to be informed to find out these information for yourself, use critical thinking to see if the author has the proper credentials to consider themselves as "cloud experts", and to make an informed decision. The resources are out there. You state it's unethical for companies to profit off of this and yet here @jarland and I (and others, sorry I'm not scrolling back up right now) who are part of this industry trying to educate the public (you) on this misunderstanding. I don't see how this is unethical. If people ask, we try to help them to the best of our abilities. Everyone who is seriously in this industry is all welcoming and helpful. If you want to judge the rest of the industry due to few people's actions, then that's on you.

    The nature of the internet suggests anyone can be an "expert", publish articles, and yet be horribly misinformed. While the term "cloud" can be argued is a buzzword for marketing purposes, experts have given it a definition that makes sense and focuses on specific features within it. It's the few "layman" who have misunderstood this definition and made it to include redundancy. Again, be a critical thinker and do your research beforehand. People make mistakes and it's part of life, but continuing to spread misinformation only hurts the industry further. Be part of the solution.

    This has taken a huge detour from the original topic of this thread, however I believe it's an important response to make.

    Note: I don't know your background so my apologies if I make some assumptions that wasn't true. I don't frequent this forum too often anymore.

    Catalyst Host - Pie Approved!
  • HalfEatenPie said: Just to point. This is not a grey area. It's defined within the National Institute of Standards and Technology, part of the US Department of Commerce.

    Oh well then...

    Seriously, in a technology field, you're going to turn to the backwards, brain-dead world of government for enlightenment? Who the fuck cares what the government says? Only those in Federal sales.

    HalfEatenPie said: There's a reason NIST had to get involved in this matter.

    There's no reason the NIST exists except to employ bureaucrats.

    Let's go back to the OP instead of this circle jerk over the One True Definition of Cloud Computing.

    imgmoney said: Can you please tell me based on the CPU and Benchmark which is good to go with ?

    No, unless that's all you care about.

    Here are some real differences between DO, Vultr, Linode:

    • differences in resource mix - more ram with Linode, more disk with DO than Vultr, etc. At the very low end, I find Vultr's 768 a little nicer than DO's 512. Vultr is strange...768M to start, next jump is 1024M.

      • DO/Vultr have a robust API, not sure about Linode
    • vs. other generic providers: the API, add-on block storage, load balancers, etc. Not as many services as AWS but vastly more than Johnny Solus.

    • DO allows block storage in three places (NYC, San Francisco, Frankfurt) while Vultr only has one atm (New Jersey)

    • DO New York is actually in New Jersey and New Jersey is gross.

    • Different mix of locales. Vultr obviously has more but there is not as much overlap as you'd think...e.g., Toronto DO vs. Chicago Vultr, DO is in India while Vultr is in Sydney, etc.

    • DO spinup is much faster (seconds), while Vultr can take 2-3 minutes. Vultr says this is because they're running through the installer on the official image...DO is using their template.

    I've generally found support on all three to be helpful.

    My Advice: VPS Advice

    For LET support, please click here.

  • Waldo19Waldo19 Member
    edited November 2016

    @HalfEatenPie said: Well, crap, this became a long post. Prepare your butts. Also I broke my "this is my last post here for 2016" promise but meh, such is life.

    I doubt this will be your last post of the year. :)

    But back on topic..... if I had to choose one it would be Vultr based on my past experiences between DO and Vultr. Never tried Linode.

  • @nullnothere said: Just curious - why aren't you considering a dedi?

    Seconding @mik997 (based on the $80/mo) that it makes more sense to shop around and pick up a significantly better dedi for the same price if you're going to be running this pretty much continuously on a monthly basis.

    Many reasons.

    Scalability. When using cloud computing, being able to scale up and down based on traffic is a good way of saving money. Suppose you have a traffic surge like, well, cyber monday. Spin up 10 more servers on that day and trash them later.

    Also Linode provide a way to scale up and down, as well as migrate disk between datacenter, and is extremely easy.

    Redundancy. Being able to load balancing servers and keeping online when one of your server crashes.

    Hourly billing. Extremely useful because of above 2 reasons. And such billing on dedi will be much more expensive.

    That being said, it all depends on the usage. In some cases, dedi works better, otherwise cloud may make more sense.

    PS: this is the most useful derailed thread I've ever seen recently.

    Thanked by 1Waldo19
  • Meo said: If the network speed and ping is important for you, then try test it?

    Vultr respond in 56ms and Linode in 112s

    ericls said: Do you have IOPS benchmark?

    Nope

  • Vultr is also great. As I sad before, I'm a DO fan, but I have services with all three.

    My only complain about vultr is that they can't wait until the end of the month like most hourly billing/cloud billing providers. Is kind of a hassle, having to be aware of the charges and to fill the account with new funds.

    If they changed that to always be at the end of the month, it would be amazing.

  • @msg7086 said:

    @nullnothere said: Just curious - why aren't you considering a dedi?

    [...] Many reasons.

    [Snipped]

    I was referring more to a dedi (instead of a cloud) based on the OPs posts questions/comments on other posts as well (see: https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/97914/choosing-cloud-vs-dedicated#latest and others where it appears that OP is just looking for a fast hosting option for his specific setup (and none of the other general cloud points that are relevant as you've pointed out).

    My question/comment was more along the lines of you're-spending-80-for-cloud-you-can-get-a-solid-dedi-at-the-same-price-with-much-better-faster-specs.

    Thanks though for your points.

  • What kind of service you will run on the server? For web hosting, Lindoe will be a good choice. For develop based service, DO seems a good option. For me, I only hosted an VPN service with Vultr.

  • @nullnothere said:

    I was referring more to a dedi (instead of a cloud) based on the OPs posts questions/comments on other posts as well (see: https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/97914/choosing-cloud-vs-dedicated#latest and others where it appears that OP is just looking for a fast hosting option for his specific setup (and none of the other general cloud points that are relevant as you've pointed out).

    My question/comment was more along the lines of you're-spending-80-for-cloud-you-can-get-a-solid-dedi-at-the-same-price-with-much-better-faster-specs.

    Thanks though for your points.

    That makes sense. Didn't see the other post. I totally agree that if you are spending 80 for that, dedis are much better options.

  • FYI for those who are interested in Linode Tokyo they apparently just opened another Tokyo2 DC.

    Maybe @AnthonySmith could offer NAT VPS out of there if the hardware/network gets better than Tokyo1

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Administrator, Top Provider

    spammy said: Maybe @AnthonySmith could offer NAT VPS out of there if the hardware/network gets better than Tokyo1

    Thanks, looks like the prices are literally half of vultr too, I guess LES Japan is migrating to Linode.

Sign In or Register to comment.