Howdy, Stranger!

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


New location. NVMe, 40G fiber. Massive discount + free DirectAdmin - Page 3
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.

New location. NVMe, 40G fiber. Massive discount + free DirectAdmin

135

Comments

  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    @intovps said:
    You you're looking to pay $3 / 1000 GB = $0.003 / GB of consumed traffic, that's something we cannot offer.

    There is lots of room between the extremes of $3 and $20 per TB ...

    @TheLinuxBug

    Interesting thoughts but I disagree. Reason: resource management and smartly fitting in combinations are a solved problem (albeit in other industries, it seems). So it is perfectly possible to offer the flexibility ("Lego system") I talked about. The only problem I would see is large upscaling, e.g. from 1 core and 512 MB mem to 6 cores and 12 GB mem - but with todays cloud infrastructure that can be done, too, especially when upscaling means (behind the scenes) creating a new VPS (possibly on another node) and transfering the system from the old node to the new one.

    Frankly, I think the major problem is the f_cking (stupid) panels almost all providers use. In fact, I'm convinced, quite many providers also lack know-how and simply ride the wave of whatever the major panels offer.

  • cybertechcybertech Member
    edited July 2019

    I suggest in automating DA license, the customer orders a monthly VPS instead of flexible billing. That way it keeps things separate and clear, and also adding the option to pay for the VPS as prepaid monthly for the above arrangement, instead of having to top up $10 to use hourly.

    Thanked by 1intovps
  • vyas11vyas11 Member
    edited July 2019

    This works for me.
    And if someone is going to spend so much time setting up DA and configure it - only to delete the VPS, then they would better worry about the wasted effort and not the $ 3 USD (or higher as their plan may be).

    On a side note- when time permits: adding the email response and the above explanation to the Knowledgebase would help :-)

    https://intovps.com/client/index.php?rp=/knowledgebase

    My other concern - bandwidth- has been discussed at length in the previous posts so I will leave it at that.

    I like what I used so far, hope my mini review till see the light of the day soon.

    Thanked by 2intovps vimalware
  • jsg said: Interesting thoughts but I disagree.

    You can disagree all you want. Again, I didn't say impossible or not eventual, however, I am explaining how, for now, the company I work for handles this. I have actually had it explained and demonstrated to me the importance of these metrics in maintaining a quality platform. That said, I am sure some small host where they are not as worried about service quality may be able to pull this off in some way. I don't know that I would suggest that model unless you have some ridiculously huge nodes where you can allocate weird amounts to some people and not have it effect the overall node in a negative way, though. Some of those running the Epyc servers with 250-500GB ram and NvME drives may be okay to do this, but someone using more conservative hardware it wouldn't be advisable.

    my 2 cents.

    Cheers!

    Thanked by 2intovps uptime
  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    It's not like "lego" cloud systems don't exist on the market.

    But breaking apart a LET low cost package into logo pieces from which clients can pick and choose has no possible economic sense for a provider.

    You get extraordinary value for your money from many LET providers.

    Need a lego cloud system? You'll find it with the much higher priced providers.

    Thanked by 2vimalware willie
  • vyas11vyas11 Member

    @cybertech said:
    I suggest in automating DA license, the customer orders a monthly VPS instead of flexible billing. That way it keeps things separate and clear, and also adding the option to pay for the VPS as prepaid monthly for the above arrangement, instead of having to top up $10 to use hourly.

    That might work a lot better for continuity- $ 10 default advance payment for the base plan anyways works out to a little over 3 months. Or 1.5 months for the $6/month.
    For the base plan,
    If the VPS + DA setup works for the first month, a user has 2 more months to take a call for the Medium to LT perspective.
    Discounting the teething troubles if any for the first month, if things do not work out in months 2 or 3, they can simply cancel and move on.

    Anyways, I am sure the OP has thought out the pricing plans well and each user knows their constraints better.

  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    @intovps said:
    It's not like "lego" cloud systems don't exist on the market.

    But breaking apart a LET low cost package into logo pieces from which clients can pick and choose has no possible economic sense for a provider.

    You get extraordinary value for your money from many LET providers.

    Need a lego cloud system? You'll find it with the much higher priced providers.

    Different things. One is a "prepackaged" special offer VPS and the other is a more general concept (and yes, the special offer could well be a part of it).

    My point with you is

    • traffic volume pricing (too high)
    • tightly coupled packages, e.g. "you want more traffic (at an acceptable price)? - just buy a larger package (where also other resources are larger than you need)". For the sake of fairness: Most other providers do the same.

    That said, I have no ill will whatsoever wrt @intovps and I apologize if you feel that I'm derailing your offer thread.

  • jackbjackb Member, Host Rep
    edited July 2019

    @jsg said:
    Interesting thoughts but I disagree. Reason: resource management and smartly fitting in combinations are a solved problem (albeit in other industries, it seems). So it is perfectly possible to offer the flexibility ("Lego system") I talked about. The only problem I would see is large upscaling, e.g. from 1 core and 512 MB mem to 6 cores and 12 GB mem - but with todays cloud infrastructure that can be done, too, especially when upscaling means (behind the scenes) creating a new VPS (possibly on another node) and transfering the system from the old node to the new one.

    Until of course a customer orders 50 256mb VMs with 10gb disk (of which he makes 5gb swap) with 16 cpu cores each and both CPU and disk performance is shot, with most available ram unallocated.

    Most providers carefully calculate what resources to allocate to get the most out of a system. You'll pay a premium if there isn't that balance.

    Thanked by 1uptime
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    @jackb said:
    Until of course a customer orders 50 256mb VMs with 10gb disk (of which he makes 5gb swap) with 16 cpu cores each and both CPU and disk performance is shot, with most available ram unallocated.

    Most providers carefully calculate what resources to allocate to get the most out of a system. You'll pay a premium if there isn't that balance.

    I understand and agree. Probably some form of balance is required to avoid extremes.

  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep
    edited July 2019

    @TheLinuxBug said:
    Usually this means you know going in that you are going to tie X amount of cpu to X amount of memory, if you don't do this you end up either over provisioning or end up with a bunch of weird sized VMs which utilize resources in a fashion that end up being abusive to the node.

    That's exactly the reason you cannot chose VMs like 20 CPU cores and 1GB RAM.

    CPU and RAM are too tightly connected to have whatever you want. Of course a provider can have two or more hardware configs, one with lots of RAM, one with lots of cores, and create the illusion that you pay only for what you need. Guess what? You're fully paying that slice of the server and price per cors and per those 256MB RAM increments will reflect that.

    However, you can do that with storage if it's network attached. Obviously you need redundant, reliable, low latency, wide b/w connection to the storages and that's what we'ee doing in Cluj.

    @jsg said:

    • traffic volume pricing (too high)
    • tightly coupled packages, e.g. "you want more traffic (at an acceptable price)? - just buy a larger package (where also other resources are larger than you need)". For the sake of fairness: Most other providers do the same.

    You're picturing a world where the LET bottom cost packages would live happily with a pick and chose system.

    So you "complain" that the +3$ upgrade gives way too much, you only want +1TB of traffic, not the +2GB RAM, not the +10GB SSD NVMe. And you're making the assumption that a provider can offer you just the +1TB traffic at let's sat $1 and ONLY IF you actually use it.

    It's not working like that. One in a hundred customers will actually use the whole traffic, that's what makes the whole package that low priced. And as I was saying, responsible overselling is good for everyone. But you take an oversold (in a good way) package, you want to pick and chose and pay for what you ACTUALLY USE, which means no overselling.

    Right. Not going to happen. Take at look at traffic pricing of the big clouds. You pay only for what you use there. ;)

    @jsg said:
    That said, I have no ill will whatsoever wrt @intovps and I apologize if you feel that I'm derailing your offer thread.

    Really no problem.

    I'm also just trying to debunk a myth and enjoy the conversation. :)

    Thanked by 2vimalware uptime
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    @intovps

    Kindly note that I'm not insane nor do I hunt weird dreams.

    Yes, I want a better traffic price. But NO, I do not expect to pay it only if fully used. What I'm taking about is the option to upgrade only e.g. the traffic for a given package or only the memory. Whether and how much of it I use it is my problem, not yours. As for the burst traffic option I meant something that is not so uncommon, e.g. with "hot" periods of businesses where they have considerably more traffic. Of course I would not expect such a burst option to carry the same price tag as a standard package. It seems natural to me that such a capability would cost something on top (of the normal traffic price).

    And please can we stop that annoying premise of the oh so friendly santa claus providers? You providers, at least in 95+% of cases, do not run special offers because you are such nice people. You do it for reasons like attracting new customers or like earning at least some money on some unused equipment, etc.

    Well noted, that's perfectly fine with me. What is not fine however is to paint it as if you acted out of generosity. You make your living with us customers and we both need each other and accordingly we should treat each other well and honestly.

    Thanked by 2alexvolk Ouji
  • donlidonli Member

    @jsg said:

    Frankly, I think that there will be a major wave of death throughout the whole VPS market once one smart provider builds and offers a VPS "Lego" system where customers can "build" their own VPS with say 1 - 8 cores, 0.5 - 16 GB memory, 10 - 250 GB disk, 0.25 - 20 TB traffic and optionally maybe even a large storage disk (HDD) from 100 - 4000 TB and all of that in reasonable steps like 256 MB steps up to 1.5 GB memory and 1 GB steps beyond.

    This is where the "serverless" (aka - pay for what resources you need and resources will be allocated as you need them) model is effectively moving to.

    Thanked by 1jsg
  • serverless... ba ha ha ha HA . and ha
    I'll probably eat my words in a few years though.

  • donlidonli Member
    edited July 2019

    @vimalware said:
    serverless... ba ha ha ha HA . and ha
    I'll probably eat my words in a few years though.

    "serverless" is a really stupid name. FaaS (Function as a Service) is much better.

  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    @jsg I don't think Santa does overselling. I don't think I am Santa.

    Just explaining to you why what you're looking for does not exist.

    Actually "lego pieces" is a really illustrative name. What's the Lego price compared with the raw material? That's how Lego clouds are priced as well.

  • I wish you guys had some RCS&RDS Direct peering/IP Transit for Cluj location.

  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    @muratai said:
    I wish you guys had some RCS&RDS Direct peering/IP Transit for Cluj location.

    We have 2 fibers from RCS & RDS in Bucharest.

  • @intovps said:

    @muratai said:
    I wish you guys had some RCS&RDS Direct peering/IP Transit for Cluj location.

    We have 2 fibers from RCS & RDS in Bucharest.

    Why does it route via UPC.ro and/or via CZ then?
    I've tested some ips from your looking glass a few minutes ago.

  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    In Cluj we don't have direct RCS & RDS connection, but in our Bucharest location.

    Bucharest, Romania:
    Test IP address: 93.113.174.139

  • @intovps said:
    In Cluj we don't have direct RCS & RDS connection, but in our Bucharest location.

    Bucharest, Romania:
    Test IP address: 93.113.174.139

    Do you have a looking glass for Bucharest location? Thank you.

  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    @muratai said:

    @intovps said:
    In Cluj we don't have direct RCS & RDS connection, but in our Bucharest location.

    Bucharest, Romania:
    Test IP address: 93.113.174.139

    Do you have a looking glass for Bucharest location? Thank you.

    Nope. We'll install one next week. hosterion.ro is hosted in Bucharest.

    Thanked by 1muratai
  • Congrats @intovps for showing Romanian love... have a few clients in Cluj that can benefit from the location. Atleast a better decent provider, the other one here on LET is a crack :wink:

    Thanked by 1intovps
  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    @mehargags said:
    Congrats @intovps for showing Romanian love... have a few clients in Cluj that can benefit from the location. Atleast a better decent provider, the other one here on LET is a crack :wink:

    Thank you :smile:

  • jmginerjmginer Member, Patron Provider

    Nice rack, what model are those switches?

  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    Edge-core AS6712-32X, 32 x QSFP+ ports of 40 GbE and running Cumulus Linux.

    https://www.edge-core.com/_upload/images/AS6712-32X_ONIE_DS_R03_0829.pdf

    A bit different than a regular LET setup :)

  • alentoalento Member, Host Rep

    @willie said:
    $10 or so deposit is completely normal for prepaid hourly-billed services. Do you seriously expect to prepay $0.0045? $10 is minimum deposit for vultr and ovh. Hetzner and DO are both postpaid (at least for me). I don't know about Lunanode. I agree it would be better to state this up front in the offer though. Maybe $7 would be more in the LET spirit but I'd tend to let this slide.

    Hi, I certainly agree that $10 deposit is completely normal - what I was pointing out is that there was no mention of that upfront unless you happened to read the FAQ. And don't be ridiculous, nobody would seriously expect to prepay $0.0045! At least I hope not. :)

    To be clear, it is not the fact that a $10 deposit is required, or that service is prepaid. It was just a surprise to me at 4 in the morning! I have been lucky perhaps (?) in that all my services are monthly billed in advance for the exact amount, or postpaid.

    @intovps has certainly earned my respect (and future business) by their willingness to lower the initial deposit to $7 or even $3 on request. I won't be making such a request, but will be signing up soonish.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    @alento said:
    Hi, I certainly agree that $10 deposit is completely normal - what I was pointing out is that there was no mention of that upfront unless you happened to read the FAQ. And don't be ridiculous, nobody would seriously expect to prepay $0.0045! At least I hope not. :)

    We've been charging a $10 credit ever since we've launched the OpentStack cloud, more than 2 years ago. I've overlooked to mention it in the initial post.

    @intovps has certainly earned my respect (and future business) by their willingness to lower the initial deposit to $7 or even $3 on request. I won't be making such a request, but will be signing up soonish.

    We stand by our offer and by the LET rules. So PM me after you place your order. :)

  • JabJabJabJab Member
    edited July 2019

    This look nice! I guess I should try to recover my account from 2010 and see what changed, it was nice back then but routing from home was meh and I had to cancel :<

    EDIT: Nope, security question from 2010 (if I ever set that tbh :D) stops me from password resetting :cold_sweat:

  • @intovps Looking at your pictures, I'm not seeing where your 1G public uplinks are, nor do I see any fiber channel switches. The 40G switches you've linked are regular Ethernet switches.

  • intovpsintovps Member, Host Rep

    @JabJab said:
    This look nice! I guess I should try to recover my account from 2010 and see what changed, it was nice back then but routing from home was meh and I had to cancel :<

    EDIT: Nope, security question from 2010 (if I ever set that tbh :D) stops me from password resetting :cold_sweat:

    Contact support. They should be able to help you.

Sign In or Register to comment.