Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Linode is great, however there are three things I really love to see.

Object Storage - Which LiquidWeb, RackSpace, AWS already has and many other Hosting Companies are providing it.

Memory Optimized Plan - Everything is getting in memory. But most dont need 20 core for 96GB Memory. There should be a low CPU count plan with 128GB+ and may be up to 512GB. ( or Higher )

CDN - Please Resell a decent CDN or even make your own one. So we can get everything in one place.

I can relate to your problem regarding the memory optimized plan. Are you aware of any cloud provider, similar to Linode or DigitalOcean, which allow to specify the numbers of cores and GBs of memory by yourself? All the services I know only provide fixed machine types.

I'd love to be fully recommending gandi.net here. I've never had any issue with them reliability-wise however they've switched to some credit-based payment plan that I just can't seem to get my head round so I've stopped using them myself. If you're able to decipher their "no bullshit" credit system, have at it


Edit: Oh nice, they've added an "Or approximately £xx.xx per month" now. Might have to give them another go

Gandi seems to be exactly what I was referring to, thanks.

Glad to hear! Just noticed the price on the lowest tier drops significantly if you lose the IPv4 address too, nice

I may have recommended a service to myself here, an odd moment for sure

Linode used to let you pay extra to add just more memory (or bandwidth or disk) but they took that option away a few years ago. I would imagine it makes provisioning the hardware a lot more difficult.

Web search returns https://rimuhosting.com/

I have no idea if they're any good.

You've brought up some good points in where Linode would need to expand to be an option for some people using, say, AWS. But I wonder if that's the right direction for them to go.

Object storage is a hard area to compete in. Amazon drives prices very low and when you're talking about object storage, durability is really important. Rackspace and LiquidWeb charge $0.10 and $0.08 per GB which is around 3x more than Amazon charges. I'm not sure Linode offering object storage for $0.08/GB would attract much business. HP offers it for $0.09 and Joyent for $0.043. Linode customers can use S3 for their storage in many cases. The case it doesn't work for are workloads where you're going to want the data more local like running Hive queries off S3 data. Would an expensive Linode S3 competitor be worth it?

A memory optimized plan could make a bit of sense, but then Linode would really need to hammer out what CPU you're paying for on the standard plans. A lot of VPS providers are giving you "vCPU" ratings, but who knows what that translates to. Linode tells us that their servers use Ivy Bridge E5-2680 v2 processors. But how many? Let's say that it has two processors. That means 20 cores and 40 virtual cores via HT. OK, how many Linodes can fit on one of these boxes. At least 96GB of Linodes. If it's 96GB of Linodes, 96 1-GB Linodes would mean 96 vCPUs - way more than there are processors. However, 1 96-GB Linode would have 20 vCPUs, less than the processors have. Amazon is a lot more through about what CPU resources you're getting. If Linode were to make a distinction between high-memory and high-CPU instances, you'd want it to be more than just "cores". If you're creating a compute cluster, the compute resources you're getting matter. Maybe this is more of a generalization of your suggestion: Linode needs to provide more resource options and make what resources you're paying for clearer.

A CDN would be an easy add-on for Linode, but without object storage, is it that interesting? I'm sure Fastly or someone else would let Linode white-label, but is it so important to have a CDN from the same provider that does your other infrastructure?

I think some of these are wanting Linode to be something that it isn't. Amazon has made AWS into a general store for compute, network, and storage stuff. You want to analyze petabytes of information? Stick it onto S3, bring it down to compute nodes with the right balance of IO, memory, disk, and CPU to do your analysis, etc. Linode is more "you want a VPS? We have VPSs!" And they're pretty great at it. They're fast, the SSDs are wonderful, and they've been a reliable member of the community for over a decade. Heck, you can even get a load balancer to handle 10,000 simultaneous connections for $20. The stuff you need to run a decent site. Digital Ocean, who likely has more funding at its disposal, hasn't gone beyond this.

Maybe it will be the next step for Linode (and DO). To get there, I think those VPS providers will have to get more serious about what resources a user actually gets.

Object Storage, I dont think the cost of Object Storage matters at the scale of Linode are trying to compete. Because anyone who needs PB or few hundred TB storage are already out of Linode's best fit range. The reason for Object Storage within the same host is the saving on Bandwidth cost. And purely in terms of instances,

There are Intel 1S 10 Core CPU that offers up to 768GB Memory if I remember correctly. Although I am not sure if the pricing works in their flavor.

CDN - I was thinking more of Linode building their own with their DC around the world, mainly as Bulk transfer. For pure Speed it would properly be EdgeCast or Fastly. But this was more of convinenet rather then necessary.

Accessing S3 from Linode is prohibitively expensive. The base storage fee is the cheap part. It costs three times as much to transfer one gigabyte of data off of S3 ($0.09) than it does to actually store the gigabyte of data there for a month ($0.03). Linode doesn't have to come anywhere near S3's storage prices in order to be competitive for Linode compute customers, as long as data transfer between Linode VMs and Linode storage is free (as it is between EC2 and S3). I'd gladly pay $0.10/GB/month for a Linode object hosting service.

I just really want VPCs type resources.

I'm happy to use object storage and CDNs from other providers but I'd rather not have to do foo to make my interal connectivity private.

Please do correct me if this is a solved problem now though.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact