Howdy, Stranger!

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


Serverbear's owners pulled the plug out, publishing new service...
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.

Serverbear's owners pulled the plug out, publishing new service...

jvnadrjvnadr Member
edited August 2016 in General

End titles for serverbear.com...
Serverscope.io, the owners of this website twitted on the 14th of August that the service is shut down, posting this message:

We shut down ServerBear today, thanks for all the support it was fun!

They released a new server benchmark service in their address, in alpha stage. As they say in their twitter account:

Our priorities for the next release in September: 
1. Improved reliability of the benchmark kit 
2. Comparison engine for the website

Unfortunately, all the data of the previous benchmarks are gone...

Thanked by 1netomx

Comments

  • GCatGCat Member

    Well, that sucks

  • Any specific reason o.O

  • Well damn. I posted several benchmarks there for my own records and comparisons... lol

    Thanked by 2GCat netomx
  • sdglhm said: Any specific reason o.O

    I suppose, because they presented a new benchmark tool. I tried it but it is buggy...
    I cannot understand: why break something that actually works?

    Thanked by 1netomx
  • LeeLee Veteran

    Seems a bit shit to just pull the plug like that, it was pretty dead in terms of any updates/development for a long time, seems more to it.

  • Does anyone have this guys contact?

    Thanked by 1netomx
  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @SysAdmin said:
    Does anyone have this guys contact?

    https://www.lowendtalk.com/profile/serverbear

    Domain still has MX records.

    Thanked by 1netomx
  • SmirSmir Member

    @jvnadr said:
    why break something that actually works?

    Because Stupid..

  • Well, tbh I never liked it. It was a script very intensive (abusive) which in my opinion didn't represented the real performance of a shared server because it's execution lasted a lot of time.

    Also, IIRC the script never was updated, to include new tests or to please some suggestions.

    So, in the meanwhile, maybe someone can fork the script and submit the data to another server and start working in a new frontend.

    Thanked by 1netomx
  • Quite unfortunate. I recall ServerBear was an excellent platform that was frequently used back in the day!

  • Anyone have any interest in LEB adopting the serverbear idea?

    Thanked by 1ManofServer
  • SysAdmin said: Anyone have any interest in LEB adopting the serverbear idea?

    Yep. That would be a nice thing to have.

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    @Amitz said:

    SysAdmin said: Anyone have any interest in LEB adopting the serverbear idea?

    Yep. That would be a nice thing to have.

    "These HVH ATOM's seem to outbench these i7 4790k's. Why am I not surprised..."

    Francisco

  • NeoonNeoon Community Contributor, Veteran

    @SysAdmin said:
    Anyone have any interest in LEB adopting the serverbear idea?

    hmm needs some cheap .net domain dam.

  • @jarland said:

    @SysAdmin said:
    Does anyone have this guys contact?

    https://www.lowendtalk.com/profile/serverbear

    Domain still has MX records.

    I find that a bit ironic coming from you :)

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    pcfreak30 said: I find that a bit ironic coming from you :)

    I'm not sure I follow :P

  • NekkiNekki Veteran

    jarland said: I'm not sure I follow :P

    I'm not sure he knows what 'ironic' means.

    Thanked by 2Crogic Pwner
  • @SysAdmin said:
    Anyone have any interest in LEB adopting the serverbear idea?

    https://www.petabyet.com/ :)

    I'll be upgrading the backend server in a few days with several new features coming.

    Thanked by 2yomero k0nsl
  • jarland said: Domain still has MX records.

    They left blog.serverbear.com online.

    PetaByet said: I'll be upgrading the backend server in a few days with several new features coming.

    Nice work there...

  • MikePTMikePT Moderator, Patron Provider, Veteran

    @PetaByet said:

    @SysAdmin said:
    Anyone have any interest in LEB adopting the serverbear idea?

    https://www.petabyet.com/ :)

    I'll be upgrading the backend server in a few days with several new features coming.

    Looks horrible on mobile

  • @jvnadr said:

    They released a new server benchmark service in their address, in alpha stage.
    ...

    Hey, just a slight correction. ServerScope is not affiliated with ServerBear.

    Here is my initial post about ServerScope: https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/85392/building-a-serverbear-alternative/p1

    Btw, before I started working on ServerScope I had reached out to ServerBear owners. My intention was to find a way how I can "resurrect" the website and get it up to date with new design / features. The old site had it's audience even after 2 years of neglect and it would be so much easier to build upon that foundation.
    Unfortunately, we couldn't find an option that would work for both of us.

    I'm very excited to work on ServerScope these days and brought a couple guys in to help me out with the development. Next release should get us almost to the point of "old" serverbear in terms of functionality and I honestly am putting every spare minute I have into it.

    Feel free to reach out to me through email on the website or PM here.

  • Dammit. The next service I use will have a data download button.

    I'd rather run my own DB for my results data if it doesn't.

  • Also, this is my goto one-liner for testing 4k read/write (4Gb file to override tiny hw-raid caches):

    ./fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75
    
  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider
    edited August 2016

    @vimalware said:
    Also, this is my goto one-liner for testing 4k read/write (4Gb file to override tiny hw-raid caches):

    ./fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=75
    

    Why would you override RAID cache when benchmarking? When you benchmark the server's performance surely WriteBack cache will increase the I/O performance on like for like machine. Such result would be skewed and would not show the true performance. I don't think it's the way to go.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • @Clouvider said:

    @vimalware said:

    Why would you override RAID cache when benchmarking? When you benchmark the server's performance surely WriteBack cache will increase the I/O performance on like for like machine. Such result would be skewed and would not show the true performance. I don't think it's the way to go.

    I love BBU caches on my online.net dedis and zfs ARC(ram) on other dedis.

    But when you're trying to fit a larger client database onto a 1-2 GB KVM, I like to know native IO capability.

    The correct way, of course, is sizing RAM to match sizeof(' active working set') of the Db and adjusting config.

    Anything over 1500 Iops is plenty really for 99% applications.

    Thanked by 1Clouvider
  • @jarland said:

    pcfreak30 said: I find that a bit ironic coming from you :)

    I'm not sure I follow :P
    @Nekki said:

    jarland said: I'm not sure I follow :P

    I'm not sure he knows what 'ironic' means.

    Err.. Funny may have been a better term to use.

    Thanked by 1jar
  • NekkiNekki Veteran

    @pcfreak30 said:

    @jarland said:

    pcfreak30 said: I find that a bit ironic coming from you :)

    I'm not sure I follow :P
    @Nekki said:

    jarland said: I'm not sure I follow :P

    I'm not sure he knows what 'ironic' means.

    Err.. Funny may have been a better term to use.

    That doesn't really track either.

    Did you mean 'appropriate' or 'proper'.

    Thanked by 1mycosys
  • @Nekki said:

    @pcfreak30 said:

    @jarland said:

    pcfreak30 said: I find that a bit ironic coming from you :)

    I'm not sure I follow :P
    @Nekki said:

    jarland said: I'm not sure I follow :P

    I'm not sure he knows what 'ironic' means.

    Err.. Funny may have been a better term to use.

    That doesn't really track either.

    Did you mean 'appropriate' or 'proper'.

    Nope. It seemed funny I guess that @jarland said that considering his background.

Sign In or Register to comment.