[App_rpt-users] VPS test results on 512mb instance

[Skyler F]

I have had two nodes,
46079 & 41694 running on a Vultr VPS instance for almost 2 years now.

I have the $5/mo 15gb SSD 1TB data plan and have had no issues. 41694 is my
bridge (echolink/IRLP/AllStar) and 46079 is my HUB.

And an Apache web server at

kd0whb.duckdns.org


On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:14 AM, Mike <mm at midnighteng.com> wrote:

> 1st. Thanks to everyone who took part in trying to test/flood that
> instance last night.
>
> As some know all the ports on this instance were blocked but 22.
>
> Just thought I should pass what I learned from the test. One thing I
> should have known better.
>
> I never wanted to run a 512mb instance for myself. Just wanted to know if
> it could be done and the limits of it. I know for sure many were going to
> try it for the attractive $2,50 a month price tag.
>
> Since you can quickly bump-up the resources, I figured..WHY NOT FIND OUT'
> initially anyway.
>
>
> Now those that tested with us know that the ports were blocked on that
> instance for 29993
>
> So I spent the night trying to find out what was up without sending a
> support ticket up the chain since I have 1 other 1gb instance 'running'
> that ran just fine. (29999) Deployed in New Jersey.
>
> So I deployed 6 other instances last night to see if I could get some
> answers. It was bugging me.
>
> And let me say, I should have known better than to test something like
> that without leaving it as a normal install that you guys might be typical
> of having, to get a result you might get yourself. But the night before I
> was loading other toys into the server when I ran into a issue and decided
> to stop because of that fact. It left it 'non-typical'.
>
> But I did 'want' to be able to say something back to the group about what
> actually happened and looking back at it, I can not.
>
> I found not only errors with my install as far as networking made more
> complicated with some of the DNS tricks I was doing with the domain name
> pointed at it. But some other type errors I found in the files. When that
> was fixed, I still had a problem.
>
> SO, I can't really slight Vultr or the 512mb instance they have.
>
> But for me, I must move on. I have a lot of stuff I want to deploy in a
> short time so I have to leave this alone for now.
>
> So if anyone creates a 512mb instance that works, please tell the group.
> Lets do a real world load test on it. I was kinda thinking that the issue
> for me may have been the vultr 'location of server' since I also had issues
> with 1gb instances at the 'MIAMI' server location. But because of my
> botched launch's and not staying on standard, I can't say for sure so take
> that for what it's worth.
>
> I never intended to run a 512mb instance, but thought it would be nice to
> know what it will handle. Since it is so easy to 'bump-up-the-resources' of
> any instance going up but not down, I wanted to test on the way up. Perhaps
> someone else will enlighten us since others have deployed these on VPS ?
> Please Do !
>
> What you should use is dependent on what you intend to do with it.
>
> If you are going to run other software/scripting that require more
> headroom, get the larger deployment of 1gb anyway.
>
> For me for now, I just believe the issues were at the miami server
> location. And that is the only place the 512mb instance were available so
> I'm moving forward without knowing.
>
> If you have deployed on a 512mb instance at vultr, and are having
> connectivity issues, I suggest creating a instance at other locations first
> and that may force you to bump-up to 1gb install if they are not available.
> I have had 0 issues with 1gb at New Jersey/New York on 4 test deployments.
> So if you don't want to waste time and can afford the $5 an month, go for
> the 1gb instance and stay away from the Miami server rack.
>
> Sorry I can't say more but I've said enough, I think. Hope that saves some
> a little head-ache of your own.
>
> But I feel strongly that these deployments will be a asset in the future,
> and encourage anyone to dabble with one.
>
> To add to that, the deployment from ISO is pretty much flawless, thanks
> guys for the hard work !
>
> 73, your tired beta tester...LOL...
>
> ...mike/kb8jnm
>
> _______________________________________________
> App_rpt-users mailing list
> App_rpt-users at lists.allstarlink.org
> http://lists.allstarlink.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
>
> To unsubscribe from this list please visit http://lists.allstarlink.org/c
> gi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users and scroll down to the bottom of
> the page. Enter your email address and press the "Unsubscribe or edit
> options button"
> You do not need a password to unsubscribe, you can do it via email
> confirmation. If you have trouble unsubscribing, please send a message to
> the list detailing the problem.




-- 
Skyler Fennell
amsatnet.info
KDØWHB
electricity440 at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.keekles.org/pipermail/app_rpt-users/attachments/20180522/3e869e8f/attachment.html>