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
benchmark:
Benchmark Run: Fri Mar 27 2015 05:54:03 - 06:22:11 1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests Dhrystone 2 using register variables 30463292.9 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Double-Precision Whetstone 3407.9 MWIPS (9.9 s, 7 samples) Execl Throughput 1348.1 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 251719.9 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 65526.4 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 823624.1 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Pipe Throughput 392464.3 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Pipe-based Context Switching 70196.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) Process Creation 3125.8 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 3153.4 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples) Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 413.1 lpm (60.1 s, 2 samples) System Call Overhead 416784.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples) System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 30463292.9 2610.4 Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 3407.9 619.6 Execl Throughput 43.0 1348.1 313.5 File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 251719.9 635.7 File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 65526.4 395.9 File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 823624.1 1420.0 Pipe Throughput 12440.0 392464.3 315.5 Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 70196.0 175.5 Process Creation 126.0 3125.8 248.1 Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 3153.4 743.7 Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 413.1 688.6 System Call Overhead 15000.0 416784.0 277.9 ======== System Benchmarks Index Score 515.7515 ?, meh..
Bench on what?
unixbench scores. a basic indicator of the performance of a Unix-like system; hence, multiple tests are used to test various aspects of the system's performance. http://code.google.com/p/byte-unixbench/
I meant bench what spec on what cloud?
Hmm. I've actually got a bit of a slow benchmark on cpu as well;
System Benchmarks Index Score 870.4 (2 CPUs, 2gb ram, 30gb disk)
And I'm on the Amsterdam Cloud.
sg location, Cloud Machine 1GB
this is nice but how we can see other order specification? im quite new to this site
What specification do you mean?
Curious: why don't you list the datacenters you use on the "Location" page?
Do any clouds?
We do detail our standards and selection on features and about and the locations page indicates the tier or certifications
Since "cloud" isn't really a word that means anything, that's not really a question that can be answered.
I'd personally expect a host to be transparent about where their services are physically located. How else am I supposed to look into the quality of the facility, and plan for redundancy? You might as well just add it...
I guess my point was that the industry norm is not to detail it. Our role is to abstract the infrastructure and deliver a standardized platform for delivering services.
That said unlike some clouds it's not a secret and we freely outline in detail every aspect of our platforms.
I guess you chose not to take the hint to avoid casually dropping the c-word here and there like that, but FYI it really sounds funny.
If you ask them for the information, yes.
So, I'm asking, what DC's are you in please?
We are in 14 facilities. In Europe mainly Interxions. In the U.S. we use ColoCrossing. In APAC all Equinix.
Right, and I don't really understand that. Here are people asking you about it explicitly, plus there's a good chance you've lost potential customers because that information isn't on your site, and adding it is a 5 minute job at worst.
It's your choice whether to add it, of course, but to me referring to the "industry norm" as a reason not to do it just seems aspirationless. Why would you treat the industry norm as your 'final goal', rather than as a minimum bar of viability that you can excel and do better at?
Right, but such infrastructure isn't that abstract. There are real consequences to using one facility over another, and ignoring them doesn't make those differences go away. These are real datapoints that real customers need to make an informed decision.
Can you list the ones that aren't at Interxion?
London, City is Telecity, Harbour Exchange. Amsterdam is Serverius.
In terms of 'consequences' of facilities, in practice there are few to none (none that I can think of in real terms). Once the customer is assured of the standard features of a facility, its tier rating, or certifications, one facility over another isn't really relevant.
Just like us using HP Blades over IBM or supermicro or our choice to run Xen over KVM.
Few customers 'care' to know, as its the service and our bona fides / trust that is important, the fact that we choose well for providers is a given (or we wouldn't remain in business, let alone grow)
If I'm storing customer data, I want to know EXACTLY where that data is being stored. I also may need to understand how each DC handles it's security.
Bullshit. Rackspace are far a bigger/more widely trusted supplier than you, and anyone with serious hosting needs would still insist they tell them exactly where my servers are, and they'd give you the answer with zero fuss.
As an example then
http://www.rackspace.co.uk/about-us/data-centres
I don't see any addresses?
they tell them exactly where my servers are, and they'd give you the answer with zero fuss.
As should be clear from this and other threads, or if you asked, we tell anyone who asks exactly where our datacentres are, our upstreams and carriers, our Hardware choices, what CPUs we use, the storage we use, our hypervisors and anything else relevant to our service to our customers.
As far as I can tell, the argument you are making is why we don't have the actual address of our datacentres on our website? (despite none of our 'competition doing so either)?
I don't see any addresses?
Like I said, if you ask them they tell you, and they don't try and palm you off. Not having it on your website and avoiding a direct question when asked are two different things.
Of relevance https://discuss.vultr.com/discussion/403/data-center-list/p1
And as I've said several times, as well as answering direct questions a few posts back, thats -exactly- how we handle it too. What is your point?
I did ask and you gave me a vague, incomplete answer, so no, it's not clear from this thread.
Who do you view as the competition?
Not really relevant, it's easy to find out where the DC's are.
I replied with an overview of facilities and the partners we use by region. I then further clarified when asked which of our EU locations were not Interxion. By all means contact [email protected] with facilities you are interested in and we can provide you with complete data.
To be fair, it's your assertion that people shouldn't care which specific DC's you use that I take more issue with, although I still don't know why you only gave me half an answer to start with, when a minute more and you could have given me a full answer.
People shouldn't care broadly speaking. If they do the information is there.
And, again to be fair: In terms of transparency and compared to Vultr, they are clear water and Vultr is true mud. Just to add: Not a dediserve fanboy here. I was not too convinced of my last trial with them. I would, however, give them my money rather than Vultr. Also because of their will to answer questions if a customer asks.