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.
[MR] What are your expectations regarding Storage VMs
This is just a short market research to help me better understand what the community wants.
I have been going through threads here a lot and when it comes to 1TB storage boxes at < € then people go bonkers & buy it all out. So what if the price is raised to maybe 8€/mo and you would get 1TB Storage boxes (KVM not OpenVZ) with around say 1GB RAM, 1 IPv4 and on Xeon E5 processor and location would be Europe (preferable OVH/SYS/Online.net/Hetzner) 1Gbit port (shared).
Would you buy it ? If not then what exactly are your expectations when you search for a storage provider ?
What are your expectations Storage VMs
- Storage117 votes
- > 500GB35.90%
- >= 1TB64.10%
- Price (monthly)117 votes
- €2 - €566.67%
- €6 - €826.50%
- +€96.84%
- Port117 votes
- 100Mbps33.33%
- 1Gbps54.70%
- 10Gbps11.97%
- Location117 votes
- Europe42.74%
- USA16.24%
- Canada5.13%
- Doesn't matter35.90%
Comments
Can you actually make enough to live on that price should be what you're asking yourself. Trying to feed the LET beast without a warchest of cash is asking for a bad case of shrinkage.
Making a $5/month profit on a server being 100% full and licensing isn't doing business, that's running a charity with some admin overhead.
Francisco
It wouldn't hurt shelling off some funds (even if it makes a loss) but would help in brand building. As the hits (losses) could be taken from the advertisement budget
EDIT:
Poll added.
That's one way to look at it i guess.
I dunno, my advice is never operate anything at a loss, even if it's in the name of advertising.
Francisco
Thanks, noted.
The poll results are showing that people want the price to be between €2 - €5 damm!
The state of the cunts who want 1TB or more for less than €5.
Sadly true. But people should realize that 5€ won't be enough if they really are serious about storing their data.
I'd bet a lot of people don't care about redundancy/resiliency - they're either looking for an additional cheap backup server or they want to torrent like crazy.
emm.... depend on purpose what I created, making the web look like Pinterest does, or some kind free photos service storage, for traffic link but you should do include bandwitch uhh I'm sorry bandwith I mean as for your parameters first.
.
well actually for porn bunker files yeah there must be picked like @nekki said, but actually it depend on how is your smart to choose themes & plugins on your engine, or maybe you offered web developer to do some kind service look like that. And I found yesterday a porn web with keeping the files on YT and do some little trick on his web, and it's pretty awesome and look like hard to find what is exactly the files where it is. I mean it's hard to report for DMCA
If you are serious about storing your data, you don't take a VPS but a small dedi or an Hetzner storage box that, starting from the BX40, costs less than 5€/month...
I find https://www.backblaze.com to be quite good when it comes to hosting critical data & have been doing it from past few years. Though I did not renew it now as I'm storing my data offline now.
The only reason I could figure out that people are sceptical to use such online services is because of privacy concerns / security breaches. I mean some people I know are paranoid & do not trust these online services when it comes to storing their personal data (pictures, etc.) Hence they intend to go with personal storage servers.
Am I right ?
yeah, I forgot backblaze is so cheap. Do you mean like this? https://torrentfreak.com/online-platforms-collaborate-ban-piracy-terrorism-report-suggests-170608/
As long on the web it said we do not responsible bla....bla... bla...., Offer private material storage service have not yet thought by me. Because I think people is still believing keep on the big company services. And if I want to create like that as Starter can't imagine how much cost of it, I have made its own self, couple months ago through on one of provider then installing nextcloud but it failed project because less spec from ideal requirement and make it unstabilize then I leave it
WTF did you expect? This is LET and anything - incl. [insert favourite female star] tits - above 5$/mo is considered too expensive.
Btw, my personal reason for neither clicking your poll nor being interested in a storage offering from you is that you didn't mention anything (but size) that is really relevant in storage, namely the kind of storage. Anything not raided, for instance, is just crap in my minds eye.
I've been using Online C14 Intensive at €5/mo and am happy with it. It has high redundancy and is pitched as very reliable, though we'll find out for real when something breaks. It charges by the GB so e.g. if you have 1.5TB there you don't get charged for 2TB.
I also have a Hetzner auction dedi which comes to around €10/TiB/month raid-1 or €5/mo no RAID, and is a powerful dedi to boot.
There's an issue with storage VPS that some just want a cheap place to park infrequently used data, while others want to run very active servers that happen to have a lot of storage.
As I see it, these should be two different products. But if someone is selling VPSs and has underutilized hardware, it's hard to turn away users with Linux isos to seed, even if the hardware provisioning is only sufficient for the infrequent-usage type of user.
It's kind of hard. I have around 3.5TB of active data of which 2.2TB is on a Hetzner auction dedi and the rest on various VPS and C14. If I had more like 5TB of data I could get another dedi and consolidate to it.
It is possible to get $10-15/TB on dedicated with raid 1, so... i would expect VM to be at least ~2x cheaper. It will not have raid 1, most likely, will have io/cpu limits etc, so why would i buy it, if it is not considerably cheaper than dedicated?
A better point to note is that I personally (and with me probably a lot of people) would prefer to pay for a storage VPS on a yearly basis, given that it's most likely being used for backup purposes.
Saves you some paypal fees too.
Because you only want 500gb or 1tb, instead of the 2.5tb that you get in a Hetzner auction server. Also the Hetzner auctions often have very old disks (I lucked out with mine), not so good for reliability. Spreading your stuff around between locations is also good. But yeah, $10/TB is the upper bound of what I'd consider to be cheap storage these days.
I've been thinking of repartitioning my Hetzner to have 5TB with no raid, backing everything up in OVH Cloud Archive hoping to not need to restore from it. OVH Cloud Archive is €.01/GB inbound or outbound bandwidth, plus €2/TB for storage, it's a big vendor, supposedly high redundancy storage like C14, etc. So stuff should be pretty safe there.
Currently paying $12.60/mo to SpeedyKVM for a 2TB KVM storage VPS and it's been excellent. No network failure, no disk fsck or clusterfucks. Pay peanuts, receive peanuts, and that's even more true with storage VPS.
So, all in all, I'm happy to pay a little extra for quality service.
There are other options, not only Hetzner. Online's ST8, SYS storage series, etc. May be not $10, but for <=$15 there are multiple options with different providers.
But yes, if you want relatively small storage this options may be just too big/expensive ant VM may be more attractive, you are right...
Also about old/desktop disks - yes, it may be a disasvantage too, but then there is no way to know what is used in those VM-s... with dedi you at least know what you have and what reliability you can expect...
Online and SYS dedicated servers come out noticeably more expensive than Hetzner in pure €/TB raw storage costs, though of course there they have their own attractions like location, network, etc.
I've lost track of SpeedyKVM promos but their regular 2TB offer is $24/month so with their 30% off coupon that's $16.8/month, pretty good though somewhat above the $12.6 that FredQc mentioned. Is there another promo or something?
It also looks like they have $4/TB Raid-60 KVM's on 36 month plans which is great if you don't mind the long term commitment, even better since it looks like a regular offer not a promo. I got put off by their hostile TOS but all customers sound satisfied so maybe I'll get a plan from them sometime.
I know this is LET but still would people risk losing their data by going for "cheap" services ?
I assumed that by default a storage server = h/w raid setup, is what everyone is aware of hence did not mention it, my bad.
But Online and SYS offer unlimited 1Gbps (0.3Gbps premium bandwidth for Online on Storage server and 0.25Gbps guaranteed for SYS) while Hetzner only free inbound and 20TB at outbound (cap 10Mbps if you exceed or 1.17EUR/TB). Further more, SYS offer IP with only setup fees (first 16IP).
If you intend to use server as storage node then Hetzner will be best choice. But for the seedbox/serve static files (which I belived most of us do) I don't think so.
One can offer a sensible storage VPS for 5$/mo. I did the calculations. If one wants to be cheap one might go with raid 5 rather than raid 1. In fact, one can even have nice quality, e.g. by putting KVM VPS on a dual L5630 a halfway decent raid controller one could offer ca. 60 storage VPS with 0.5TB, 1 TB, and 2 and even 4 TB raided storage. Say, 500 GB for 4.50$ and bang you have your storage VPS of good quality below the magic 5$/mo.
Hostigation (no longer does storage) did RAID-5 SATA back in the day if memory servers @mitGib
Now I'm curious.
RAID-5 or RAID-1 for storage @Francisco @KuJoe @NickA @DaveA (ha!)
We got some 6's and some 60's. The 6's are going to be retired in the next couple weeks as we are running into IOP starvation at this point.
Before I did the RAM upgrade on the plans they were mostly used for backups and the random torrenter here/there, so they kept pretty calm. Post RAM upgrade there's been a lot of people treating them like slices. I've had more than a few people ticket asking why we aren't giving 250GB of SSD for $7.00/month, etc.
We do have a block storage offering coming up very shortly for the Slices though that'll also phase out the current storage plan. Initial idea is $5/TB but may decide to offering 250/500's too.
Francisco
RAID5 here for our Storage VPSs.
Plus the 10gbps port. Mmmmm yes pls
Yes, we had a lot of different promos and it got tiring tbh with people asking for even more coupons, which is why we just put the 36-month super discounted storage plan right on the homepage. We'll remove it if/when it sells out, it basically relies on a supply of free disks from when clients upgrade existing dedicated servers with bigger disks. So it is sustainable for us, but maybe not for other providers. In turn, us making new revenue from those disks allows us to keep our prices low for the original customers.
LMK what about the SpeedyKVM TOS you don't like and I'll try to make it less assholish.
Simple thing (remember, we're talking about cheap storage VPS): Assume, you want to build up a 20TB with 2TB disks: With R1 you'll end up with 20 disks, with R5 you'll need but 11 (or 12, as I would advise).
R5 also uses both the hdd slots and the SAS ports much more efficiently which is important as both can't be linearly scaled ad infinitum and things get seriously expensive really quickly.
As for R10 which is très chique in VPS circles, let's not even start looking at that ... (in our example 40 disks, 40 hdd slots, 40 ports ...)
(Re. Francisco and R6[x]: R6 is nice in adding yet more resilience but is a pig when writing due to rather processor expensive Galois Field based calculations (while R5 gets away with xor). Hence I think that R6 makes little sense in hosting except maybe for the high end segment).
Just read it from the point of view of a low drama customer looking for hosts who are easy to deal with, and see how you think it comes across.
I wonder how bad that is. The GF product is a few table lookups plus the xor, with the tables small enough to all fit in L1 cache. Ceph and the like do network operations in addition to that, and they work ok. I'm generally skeptical of R5 and would want to use R6 when possible.