@sanvit said:
How's their webhosting lineup? Some offers seems pretty attractive with the included domains and support for Python. Can I run e.g. Django/Flask with it?
TL;DR: I tried their web hosting (and "hourly billed VMs") once and wasn't satisfied. Not due to performance, though.
They had some annoying issues such as not being able to register with them if your domains' nameservers are not showing to them.
This is a pita, because in order to avoid downtime, I usually transfer sites by just editing my Hosts file accordingly and only when everything has been moved AND works, I'll update the nameservers. There were some other things, but the takeaway, just like my experiences with their "hourly billing", is that they probably offer great performance and specs for an amazing price, but there were just some things I was getting annoyed of (also no "free" backups for shared hosting and you can't just restore with 1 click; for Shared Hosting I would only choose providers that at least include weekly backups). At the end of the day, they are great for what they are, just not my cup of tea. I really want to like them, but can't bring myself to do so. As long as there are enough good alternatives out there, I'll dodge them.
It's funny: I was thinking of your view (which I know ) when I wrote the second paragraph of my post immediately following yours
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
Yup, that seems to be the case on my testing as well. They seem to have their own set of relaying IPs which works pretty well. However it seems like they have separate instances for email, which means you either have to get SSL certs manually (no Let's Encrypt), or use their domains for MX/Webmail
Yup, that seems to be the case on my testing as well. They seem to have their own set of relaying IPs which works pretty well. However it seems like they have separate instances for email, which means you either have to get SSL certs manually (no Let's Encrypt), or use their domains for MX/Webmail
At least for now, I decided to go with the flow and to use their domains for MX and Webmail. In this case, Let's Encrypt isn't an issue
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
@sanvit said:
How's their webhosting lineup? Some offers seems pretty attractive with the included domains and support for Python. Can I run e.g. Django/Flask with it?
TL;DR: I tried their web hosting (and "hourly billed VMs") once and wasn't satisfied. Not due to performance, though.
They had some annoying issues such as not being able to register with them if your domains' nameservers are not showing to them.
This is a pita, because in order to avoid downtime, I usually transfer sites by just editing my Hosts file accordingly and only when everything has been moved AND works, I'll update the nameservers. There were some other things, but the takeaway, just like my experiences with their "hourly billing", is that they probably offer great performance and specs for an amazing price, but there were just some things I was getting annoyed of (also no "free" backups for shared hosting and you can't just restore with 1 click; for Shared Hosting I would only choose providers that at least include weekly backups). At the end of the day, they are great for what they are, just not my cup of tea. I really want to like them, but can't bring myself to do so. As long as there are enough good alternatives out there, I'll dodge them.
It's funny: I was thinking of your view (which I know ) when I wrote the second paragraph of my post immediately following yours
Haha yeah. You know, I'd love to like them. But somehow it just never worked out. Good to hear you're happy with Web 1000 for email, though
@yokowasis said:
How is their root server performance? Is it better than ksle?
KS LE was E5-1620 or so, right? afaik that's somewhere in the range 850/3500 GB5 , so I'd say with a netcup root server 4 core you'd be in about that same range performance wise, maybe a tad lower. 6 or even 8 cores should yield better multicore already.
for disk it obivously does not make much sense to compare, because kimsufi is larger HDD whereas netcup is speedier ssd.
not to speak of shitty 100 Mbit network with kimsufi... so for my use cases I'd always pick a RS 2000 over that KS LE.
@sanvit said:
How's their webhosting lineup? Some offers seems pretty attractive with the included domains and support for Python. Can I run e.g. Django/Flask with it?
TL;DR: I tried their web hosting (and "hourly billed VMs") once and wasn't satisfied. Not due to performance, though.
They had some annoying issues such as not being able to register with them if your domains' nameservers are not showing to them.
This is a pita, because in order to avoid downtime, I usually transfer sites by just editing my Hosts file accordingly and only when everything has been moved AND works, I'll update the nameservers. There were some other things, but the takeaway, just like my experiences with their "hourly billing", is that they probably offer great performance and specs for an amazing price, but there were just some things I was getting annoyed of (also no "free" backups for shared hosting and you can't just restore with 1 click; for Shared Hosting I would only choose providers that at least include weekly backups). At the end of the day, they are great for what they are, just not my cup of tea. I really want to like them, but can't bring myself to do so. As long as there are enough good alternatives out there, I'll dodge them.
It's funny: I was thinking of your view (which I know ) when I wrote the second paragraph of my post immediately following yours
Haha yeah. You know, I'd love to like them. But somehow it just never worked out.
Na ja, not every romance was meant to be.
Good to hear you're happy with Web 1000 for email, though
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
@yokowasis said:
How is their root server performance? Is it better than ksle?
KS LE was E5-1620 or so, right? afaik that's somewhere in the range 850/3500 GB5 , so I'd say with a netcup root server 4 core you'd be in about that same range performance wise, maybe a tad lower. 6 or even 8 cores should yield better multicore already.
for disk it obivously does not make much sense to compare, because kimsufi is larger HDD whereas netcup is speedier ssd.
not to speak of shitty 100 Mbit network with kimsufi... so for my use cases I'd always pick a RS 2000 over that KS LE.
@yokowasis said:
How is their root server performance? Is it better than ksle?
KS LE was E5-1620 or so, right? afaik that's somewhere in the range 850/3500 GB5 , so I'd say with a netcup root server 4 core you'd be in about that same range performance wise, maybe a tad lower. 6 or even 8 cores should yield better multicore already.
for disk it obivously does not make much sense to compare, because kimsufi is larger HDD whereas netcup is speedier ssd.
not to speak of shitty 100 Mbit network with kimsufi... so for my use cases I'd always pick a RS 2000 over that KS LE.
@yokowasis said:
How is their root server performance? Is it better than ksle?
KS LE was E5-1620 or so, right? afaik that's somewhere in the range 850/3500 GB5 , so I'd say with a netcup root server 4 core you'd be in about that same range performance wise, maybe a tad lower. 6 or even 8 cores should yield better multicore already.
for disk it obivously does not make much sense to compare, because kimsufi is larger HDD whereas netcup is speedier ssd.
not to speak of shitty 100 Mbit network with kimsufi... so for my use cases I'd always pick a RS 2000 over that KS LE.
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
@yokowasis said:
How is their root server performance? Is it better than ksle?
KS LE was E5-1620 or so, right? afaik that's somewhere in the range 850/3500 GB5 , so I'd say with a netcup root server 4 core you'd be in about that same range performance wise, maybe a tad lower. 6 or even 8 cores should yield better multicore already.
for disk it obivously does not make much sense to compare, because kimsufi is larger HDD whereas netcup is speedier ssd.
not to speak of shitty 100 Mbit network with kimsufi... so for my use cases I'd always pick a RS 2000 over that KS LE.
What's netcup policy about torrenting ?
Just don't
Or just spin up the bithex rtorrentvpn docker container, connect it with your vpn provider and torrent without problems - killswitch included even at netcup or other german hosts
@hostarts said:
Just noticed that they doubled pricing for the high end root servers. They still are one of the best providers around according to my experience.
I wouldn't say doubled, a little bump for the new G9.5 line with a little bump in specs
@yokowasis said:
How is their root server performance? Is it better than ksle?
KS LE was E5-1620 or so, right? afaik that's somewhere in the range 850/3500 GB5 , so I'd say with a netcup root server 4 core you'd be in about that same range performance wise, maybe a tad lower. 6 or even 8 cores should yield better multicore already.
for disk it obivously does not make much sense to compare, because kimsufi is larger HDD whereas netcup is speedier ssd.
not to speak of shitty 100 Mbit network with kimsufi... so for my use cases I'd always pick a RS 2000 over that KS LE.
What's netcup policy about torrenting ?
Fill free, was doing that for a long-long time. But were using only semi/private torrent trackers
Comments
It's funny: I was thinking of your view (which I know
) when I wrote the second paragraph of my post immediately following yours 
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
I actually got a plan, and it seems like as long as I set the A record correctly, it works fine
Yup, that seems to be the case on my testing as well. They seem to have their own set of relaying IPs which works pretty well. However it seems like they have separate instances for email, which means you either have to get SSL certs manually (no Let's Encrypt), or use their domains for MX/Webmail
At least for now, I decided to go with the flow and to use their domains for MX and Webmail.
In this case, Let's Encrypt isn't an issue
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
Haha yeah. You know, I'd love to like them. But somehow it just never worked out. Good to hear you're happy with Web 1000 for email, though
Ympker's Shared/Reseller Hosting Comparison Chart, Ympker's VPN LTD Comparison, Uptime.is, Ympker's GitHub.
How is their root server performance? Is it better than ksle?
KS LE was E5-1620 or so, right? afaik that's somewhere in the range 850/3500 GB5 , so I'd say with a netcup root server 4 core you'd be in about that same range performance wise, maybe a tad lower. 6 or even 8 cores should yield better multicore already.
for disk it obivously does not make much sense to compare, because kimsufi is larger HDD whereas netcup is speedier ssd.
not to speak of shitty 100 Mbit network with kimsufi... so for my use cases I'd always pick a RS 2000 over that KS LE.
Na ja, not every romance was meant to be.
It's really good for email, I would say.
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
If want to enjoy the speed, I prefer netcup, the performance is not worse than ksle, or even better than it.
What's netcup policy about torrenting ?
don't.
Just don't
Ympker's Shared/Reseller Hosting Comparison Chart, Ympker's VPN LTD Comparison, Uptime.is, Ympker's GitHub.
I hope that this doesn't count as a necro, but I just wanted to share my netcup cup, which arrived today:
The three sweets were in the cup, which was a nice touch
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
Or just spin up the bithex rtorrentvpn docker container, connect it with your vpn provider and torrent without problems - killswitch included
even at netcup or other german hosts
Just noticed that they doubled pricing for the high end root servers. They still are one of the best providers around according to my experience.
Web Hosting - VPS Cloud - Dedicated Offers Managed Hosting Made Easy Dedicated Servers, Private Cloud, Colocation, VPS, Shared & Reseller Hosting , Canada Hosting - Algerian DC Hosting
I wouldn't say doubled, a little bump for the new G9.5 line with a little bump in specs
Fill free, was doing that for a long-long time. But were using only semi/private torrent trackers