3 ms·
I'm actually disappointed. I liked the 768 package, it was big enough that you could run a fair amount of stuff [0], and cost only $30/month. I was planning on
by swalberg 14y ago
I'm actually disappointed. I liked the 768 package, it was big enough that you could run a fair amount of stuff [0], and cost only $30/month. I was planning on buying a new one over my Christmas holidays and moving my stuff over so I could get onto a newer CentOS. CPU has never been a problem, so this new priority is meaningless to me.
For my needs, $30/mo was about as much as I'd spend on a server to host mine and a few friend's blogs, some photos, and some remote services. $40 is too much for me and the lower plan just doesn't have enough RAM to be interesting.
So now my options are 1) find somewhere else, or 2) backup my data and rebuild the box in place.
0 - I manage a few Linode 768s including my own. 768 was a great size for a few small blogs and a low traffic Rails site, or a larger traffic blog.
- aaroneous 14y ago768 is still available as a resize option - not sure if that's a mistake though...
- pygatea 14y agoAnother potential option is using a Linode 512 with "extra" RAM (see the Extras tab in the Linode Manager). Additionally, I've always found the Linode support folks to be fairly accommodating, so maybe it's worth asking if they can still provision 768s.
- swalberg 14y agoYea, some people suggested that in the forums. It doesn't end up being the full 768 (which is not the end of the world) but you also lose the extra HDD and bandwidth so you're actually paying more at that point.
- shiftpgdn 14y agoHave you thought about switching over to a kimsufi.ie server? Your $30 will go a lot further and you're not sharing a disk or CPU. I'd only stick with linode if you need the scale-ability.