Friday, February 18


The Times, They Are A Changing

I was just poking around LiquidWeb's configurator - used to be hosted there, years ago, and I was very happy with their support, and only moved because they didn't have quite what I was looking for when it came time to upgrade - anyway, I was poking around their configurator, and I noticed this:
Need more RAM? See our Enterprise Series Servers.
More than 64GB, that is.

The Enterprise Series goes up to 256GB.  That's quite a lot for a web server.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 06:45 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ah, so they support Rails and MongoDB now.


Posted by: J Greely at Saturday, February 19 2011 02:18 AM (2XtN5)

2 I remember how about 3 years back I was reviewing a bugfix for "RHEL 5 cannot boot on server with more than 1 TB of RAM" (it was an Itanium server with 1024 CPUs which they tried to upgrade so). Japaaaaan.

Posted by: Pete Zaitcev at Saturday, February 19 2011 05:48 AM (9KseV)

3 I meant to add that I'm happy how a full quarter of that spec is within Pixy's reach now, so that's pretty cool. Also, I'm sure they have it on normal x86 CPUs now. Itanic runs normal OSes with an equivalent of QEMU, with pretty good performance even, but it's hideously expensive.

Posted by: Pete Zaitcev at Saturday, February 19 2011 06:01 AM (9KseV)

4 Yeah, no-one wants Itanium.

Hosting companies overcharge like mad for RAM, which pisses me off royally.  SoftLayer charge $25 per GB per month - which is highway robbery when server memory costs less about $25 per GB.  (They usually have a half-price memory special running, which leaves you only paying the full price of the memory every two months.  Still appalling.)

Posted by: Pixy Misa at Saturday, February 19 2011 06:58 AM (PiXy!)

5 I'm ok with the idea, although perhaps not with specific coefficient. When someone uses those N gigabytes, it means they cannot host someone else in there, so denies them the revenue. The question is, are the profit margins healthy?

Posted by: Pete Zaitcev at Saturday, February 19 2011 10:19 AM (9KseV)

6 Well, mine aren't. wink

And yeah, it's the coefficient that galls me.  I fully expect to pay more for the hardware when I'm leasing it month-to-month.  For example, SoftLayer's pricing for SSDs means I pay the full purchase price every 8 months.  No problem with that!  They keep them in stock, swap them out for me if I have a failure, and if I want to upgrade or downgrade I can do so at any time.  They incur costs providing that sort of service, and I'm happy to pay for it.

But paying the full purchase price 6 times per year is galling.  If they halved their price, I'd just get twice as much RAM, and after the first couple of months their profit would be the same.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at Saturday, February 19 2011 01:50 PM (PiXy!)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
48kb generated in CPU 0.0203, elapsed 0.7424 seconds.
56 queries taking 0.7325 seconds, 345 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.