3 ms·

I would hope it's not abusive of me, I think I'm using around 136Mb/s of the promised 200. It's a Tor relay so it happily takes all the bandwidth it can get. An

by tux3 10y ago

I would hope it's not abusive of me, I think I'm using around 136Mb/s of the promised 200. It's a Tor relay so it happily takes all the bandwidth it can get. And I sure am happy to give them free press, it is pretty incredible :) The CPU on the other hand isn't the beefiest (there are comparative benchmarks floating around), the advantage is probably going to be the predictable latency since it (almost) all runs on bare metal.

logicallee 10y ago
I don't understand your numbers. 1 month in seconds is 2,629,743 seconds [1] and at 136 MB/s that is 357 TiB [2] - almost 10 times what you quoted. Are you really averaging 136 Mb/s day-in, day-out? Also, I'd like to understand this: >the advantage is probably going to be the predictable latency since it (almost) all runs on bare metal. Surely you get a VM don't you? How can it run on bare metal while giving you full access to your image? What did you mean by this bare metal remark . . . Thanks! [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=1+month+in+seconds https://www.google.com/search?q=1+month+in+seconds [2] https://www.google.com/search?q=136+mb%2Fsecond+*+1+month https://www.google.com/search?q=136+mb%2Fsecond+*+1+month
- tux3 10y ago
  >I don't understand your numbers. 1 month in seconds is 2,629,743 seconds [1] and at 136 MB/s that is 357 TiB [2] - almost 10 times what you quoted Almost exactly 8 times, as a matter of fact :) I use Mb/s for megabits/s and not megabytes, so that comes out to a bit more than 40TiB, 20 up and 20 down. (The 136Mb/s I estimated was a big too high, actually. Here is my bandwidth chart if you're interested: https://i.imgur.com/l1rCeHC.png https://i.imgur.com/l1rCeHC.png) >Surely you get a VM don't you? How can it run on bare metal while giving you full access to your image? What did you mean by this bare metal remark . . . Thanks! I believe they have their own custom hardware that they manage directly, they spin one up and you run bare metal on one of these with some local SSDs attached. With the exception of, I think, the VPS which is KVM.
  - logicallee 10y ago
    Thanks. Right, I just let Google do the conversion (per my footnotes) and didn't think about the bit/byte thing - ooops. Do you run a web server on yours? Can you check locally what your actual latency is for curl-ing (or wgeting) a page? I mean the actual timestamp difference from your local machine, such as your laptop or desktop. I don't intend to have a lot of traffic but I really, really hate latency. thanks for all this info btw.
    - tux3 10y ago
      No problem! I checked with an apache2 instance on a VC1S in Paris, my ping to it is 25ms and curl from my laptop takes about 90ms. Hope that helps.
      - logicallee 10y ago
        Yes! This is useful. Thank you :)

by tux3 10y ago

logicallee 10y ago

I don't understand your numbers. 1 month in seconds is 2,629,743 seconds [1] and at 136 MB/s that is 357 TiB [2] - almost 10 times what you quoted. Are you really averaging 136 Mb/s day-in, day-out? Also, I'd like to understand this: >the advantage is probably going to be the predictable latency since it (almost) all runs on bare metal. Surely you get a VM don't you? How can it run on bare metal while giving you full access to your image? What did you mean by this bare metal remark . . . Thanks! [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=1+month+in+seconds https://www.google.com/search?q=1+month+in+seconds [2] https://www.google.com/search?q=136+mb%2Fsecond+*+1+month https://www.google.com/search?q=136+mb%2Fsecond+*+1+month

tux3 10y ago
>I don't understand your numbers. 1 month in seconds is 2,629,743 seconds [1] and at 136 MB/s that is 357 TiB [2] - almost 10 times what you quoted Almost exactly 8 times, as a matter of fact :) I use Mb/s for megabits/s and not megabytes, so that comes out to a bit more than 40TiB, 20 up and 20 down. (The 136Mb/s I estimated was a big too high, actually. Here is my bandwidth chart if you're interested: https://i.imgur.com/l1rCeHC.png https://i.imgur.com/l1rCeHC.png) >Surely you get a VM don't you? How can it run on bare metal while giving you full access to your image? What did you mean by this bare metal remark . . . Thanks! I believe they have their own custom hardware that they manage directly, they spin one up and you run bare metal on one of these with some local SSDs attached. With the exception of, I think, the VPS which is KVM.
- logicallee 10y ago
  Thanks. Right, I just let Google do the conversion (per my footnotes) and didn't think about the bit/byte thing - ooops. Do you run a web server on yours? Can you check locally what your actual latency is for curl-ing (or wgeting) a page? I mean the actual timestamp difference from your local machine, such as your laptop or desktop. I don't intend to have a lot of traffic but I really, really hate latency. thanks for all this info btw.
  - tux3 10y ago
    No problem! I checked with an apache2 instance on a VC1S in Paris, my ping to it is 25ms and curl from my laptop takes about 90ms. Hope that helps.
    - logicallee 10y ago
      Yes! This is useful. Thank you :)