Falzo
Falzo
Comments
-
yeah that's simply not how networking and even physics work with that distance...
-
fair enough, single thread across the pond, you are right, never gonna burst that 10Gbit (with no provider). ;-) ;-)
-
iperf (multithreaded) says otherwise... [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 10.8 GBytes 9.31 Gbits/sec 39755 sender[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 10.8 GBytes 9.28 Gbits/sec receiveriperf Done. ed: frankfurt to hamburg (wilhelm.tel)
-
Azure North Europe, Standard E4ds_v4 (4 vcpus, 32 GiB memory), Premium SSD LRS, (small tier, 500iops/100MBps, but burstable) # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## Yet-Another-Bench-Script ## v2021-06-05 ## https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ##…
-
that's brutal... NL? which dc/provider and colo price if I may ask? also could you run a GB5 just to make it complete - thanks in advance.
-
@Ympker @mikho at least for germany I think that this nothing really new but how contractual law works. think of it as an abstraction. there is something each party owes to the other, so for the buyer that obligation obviously is to pay. just because you paid but for whatever reason claimed the money back doesn't free you…
-
just by chance... aws t3.xlarge, eu-west-1 (ireland) with GP3 ssd # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## Yet-Another-Bench-Script ## v2021-06-05 ## https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #Tue Sep 21 22:50:38 UTC 2021Basic System…
-
it still is not an error and never has been ;-) only a warning. and yes, severity is a thing here... and that's also why it still worked on the frontend, no matter the warning being there
-
I like that approach, especially if it makes you use one unneccessary plugin less. though, you could have set the error reporting differently instead as @vedran suggested in the beginning. would have made that warning go away as well :-P
-
told you so :-P ;-) ;-) ;-)
-
don't change .= to = unless you know for sure that this isn't inside a loop or that var might be prefilled elsewhere under some circumstances. apart from that @vedran is right and it's probably just a notice/warning and not a real error. you could wrap a check around it to see if that var is empty or not. for why this…
-
yes, sir! edit: another one fresh from the oven: # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## Yet-Another-Bench-Script ## v2021-06-05 ## https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #Mon Sep 6 08:52:08 EDT 2021Basic System…
-
frankfurt, clouvider network, IPv4, 3TB bw, twenny a year? dude... seriously.
-
I am pretty sure they will sell them quickly enough anyway. demand will always be there and also not everyone needs or cares about additional IPs, so... as said, IP pricing is not neccessarily the main criteria or highest priority to every client. I'd rather assume that not even half of their customer need additional IPs…
-
but but but...
-
I am pretty sure iperf in yabs does not write anything to the disks, so this won't apply ;-) (and disk speed test are directly above anyway ;-)))
-
polarbear storage from last BF, pushing nightly backups to it so today logged in after quite some time to check and actually run a bench to post and recommend your services @servarica_hani because performance is decent and stable. sadly just now iowait is through the roof. fio looks not so bad, no idea if network is…
-
you'll definitely benefit more from splitting things across two boxes instead of just aiming for a bigger cpu and stuff. if you're happy with OVH just get a second box from them, maybe even SYS for cost effectiveness and depending on how to split ;-) with proxmox you could build a cluster though and move guests... so much…