LowEndBox

Hosting Websites on Bare Minimum VPS/Dedicated Servers

ClubUptime – $5.95 512MB OpenVZ VPS Birthday Sale

Tags: , , , , Date/Time: February 5, 2011 @ 1:14 pm, by LowEndAdmin
Updated August 2011 — ClubUptime is officially in the dead pool. IP has not been resolving since 3 August. Please see discussion thread at LowEndTalk.

ClubUptime Matthew from Club Uptime emailed me about their Six Year Anniversary Sale. Use promo code MBD2011-DOUBLEUP to get double the disk space + monthly data on all their VPS packages. Update: Budget VPS gets double disk space/monthly data automatically and no coupon code needed. This is what you will get for $5.95/month “Level 1″ plan:

  • 512MB guaranteed/1024MB burstable memory
  • 20GB storage
  • 200GB/month data transfer
  • OpenVZ/SolusVM

They are with Softlayer in either Dallas TX, Seattle WA or Washington D.C. and will hopefully be expanded to Amsterdam and Singapore once Softlayer gets there. I guess “six year” is mainly about Matt’s years of experience as the domain wasn’t registered until August 2009. They did have raving reviews from previous posts. It’s operated as an LLC from Florida.

151 Comments

  1. You’re absolutely correct. Club Uptime, LLC is one in the same as HostTDS.com (Registered in February 2005). Hence the six-year anniversary :)

    February 5, 2011 @ 2:34 pm | Reply
    • As a note — NO COUPONS ARE NECESSARY FOR BUDGET PLANS! THE DOUBLE-UP SPECIAL TAKES PLACE AUTOMATICALLY!

      February 5, 2011 @ 9:59 pm | Reply
    • MBD2011-25off for managed VPS packages, no for unmanaged, just doubled space and monthly data,…..:(
      And, Is any coupon available?

      February 12, 2011 @ 1:33 am | Reply
  2. Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

    I love their art.

    February 5, 2011 @ 2:48 pm | Reply
  3. fanovpn:

    I signed up for a Club Uptime box a bit over a week ago, in Dallas, using the New Year’s 50% off code. I haven’t done much with the server yet, but its the fastest of the VPSes I’ve tried for disk speed, and well above average in CPU and network speed. Setup was instant, and ticket response has been helpful and virtually instant too.

    Even with this doubling offer the HD space and bandwidth are smaller than average, but they’re high enough for me and it seems to keep the torrenters and abusers away. I’m only one week in, but so far I’m very happy.

    February 5, 2011 @ 3:41 pm | Reply
  4. ZAY:

    any chance you could double the RAM as well? :) Or at least 50% more?

    February 5, 2011 @ 3:46 pm | Reply
    • Contact sales@clubuptime.com — We’ll see what we can do ;)

      February 5, 2011 @ 4:13 pm | Reply
      • John:

        Wow, I wasn’t really looking for a new VPS, but you seem to be pretty dedicated to meeting customers needs. I might check out your package, but I have to ask, in defining “Game Server Hosting” in your AUP, does that include purely PHP-based games, such as PHP RPGs?

        February 5, 2011 @ 4:26 pm | Reply
        • Nope. We’re talking about Minecraft more than anything. Minecraft is very poorly designed and tends to cause lots of server load issues. An RPG based on PHP very rarely causes any sort of load.

          February 5, 2011 @ 5:43 pm | Reply
        • I run servers based on quake 3

          Rarely a left 4 dead or killing floor server. That isn’t allowed to?

          February 5, 2011 @ 11:29 pm | Reply
        • Those will be allowed on our new game server platform. :)

          February 6, 2011 @ 11:01 am | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

          So, will will actually get a XEN VPS for these gameserver VPS, I prefer to have root.

          February 6, 2011 @ 12:12 pm | Reply
      • Tom:

        @Daniel, you think they will release xen for the same price as openvz? Not happening ;)
        Look at how nordic oversells there openvz, the xen price is 3x of openvz ;)

        February 6, 2011 @ 3:28 pm | Reply
  5. John seo:

    One of the best provider out there.
    I have two vps with them and they just offered 50% more for HD and BW on top of what I have.
    Matt is a great guy.
    The server never goes down.

    February 5, 2011 @ 4:02 pm | Reply
  6. @ whats funny here lol
    John wrote:/ look at the date February 5, 2011

    few minutes later look at the date

    John seo wrote: / look at the date February 5, 2011 @ 4:02 pm

    26 seconds, took Mr John from asking about having PHP RPGs?, to I have two vps with them and they just offered 50%

    im thinking if the admin checked Mr John seo IP it would show a proxy address i bet you any money on it, and i bet John seo is actually Matthew Rosenblatt lol

    oh dear can anybody get a vps in under 26 seconds ?

    February 5, 2011 @ 5:28 pm | Reply
    • John has been a customer of ours for several months. I am not John. You can even ask Low End Admin to verify that via IP logs if you’d wish.

      February 5, 2011 @ 5:44 pm | Reply
    • John:

      Sorry for the confusion. I’m new to LEB, and probably should have picked a more unique username than my own name; especially since it’s quite common. Anyway, I don’t know who John seo is, but I know he’s not me. I’ll pick a different nick for posts after this.

      @Matthew, Thanks. I’ll have to discuss your plan with my co-developer. It looks to be plenty ample in specs, and it’s only a little above our development price range.

      February 5, 2011 @ 6:32 pm | Reply
      • New to LEB? The record shows that you have been commenting here for about 5 months, is one of regular commenters here, and is *definitely* not Matthew :)

        February 6, 2011 @ 11:46 am | Reply
  7. It’s due to posts being released from Moderation?

    February 5, 2011 @ 5:45 pm | Reply
  8. John seo:

    Alexande @ Forest Gump once said “stupid is stupid does”.
    I even wrote here about two weeks ago that Matt doesn’t like ‘Upper Case typing’,
    I don’t always cheer for anybody, I point what’s good, what’s bad.
    If Matt gives out bad vps or bad deal, all I have to do is “leave”.
    Since I’ve got his generous offer with a good m/c, I have to cheer him up.
    Live it up, Matt!

    February 5, 2011 @ 6:20 pm | Reply
  9. I see a clock counter for release Gameservers at clubuptime.

    I am wondering how much it will cost :D

    February 5, 2011 @ 7:26 pm | Reply
  10. The description on this post is a little misleading. The MBD2011-DOUBLEUP code is intended only for managed plans. Here is the link to our doubled OpenVZ plans. There’s no need to enter a discount code to purchase these.

    February 5, 2011 @ 9:56 pm | Reply
  11. Tom:

    After reading there tos I still can’t stop laughing.

    “TeamSpeak and Ventrillo. These programs tend to be bandwidth and processor heavy, quickly leading to bandwidth overages”

    They use less then 20mhz CPU, they barely use any bw at all, there codecs are modem-like age and what does bw use has to do with your miserable bw allocation, so you customers shouldn’t even expect to use 200GB of bw?

    “Graphical User Interfaces (GUI) are not allowed on our OpenVZ/Budget platforms.”

    First providers in history to bitch about VNC rofl, they run normally on 512MB-1GB VPS, I know you just don’t want to get them running because if the user will buy 512MB VPS he will consume all his RAM, and bo bo you can’t oversell :D CPU depends of what the user is doing, just running VNC it should be idling at nore mot then 100mhz.

    Front page says:

    “We offer a Five Nines uptime guarantee on all products and services. This means that your account will have no more than about six minutes downtime over the course of an entire year caused by network connectivity issues. ”

    6 minutes of downtime over the hole year SUPERB!! Ow wait, but your TOS says:

    “Club Uptime will provide an account credit of 5% per 1 hour of continuous downtime beyond the first hour of continuous downtime,”

    Why write something like this when you offer 99.99999% SLA uptime in the first place? Ow I know, it’s called FALSE ADVERTISING, when you expect your TOS not to be read before purchase is made.

    If anyone is looking for Softlayer VPS it’s better to overpay a few dollars and buy from QuickWeb, that have no TOS excuse policies for when they will have downtime and no ridiculous AUP against harmless Vent, VNC.

    February 6, 2011 @ 3:50 pm | Reply
    • If you’re looking to host a Ventrilo server, you’re welcome to Google “Ventrilo Hosting” and take your pick from the list of hosts that appear. We’ve decided to prohibit them as we’ve had a number of problems with unlocked servers eating bandwidth.

      Second of all, we include the SLA credit as a way of helping customers who do have the misfortune of experiencing any downtime. Looking back through the ticket history over the past year, we’ve had a grand total of zero claims for SLA credit. Isn’t having an extra insurance policy for clients a good thing? From what I can gather from what you’ve said, it’s not.

      I’d like you to find me a complaint about us overselling and link me to it. I guarantee you won’t.

      I’m inclined to believe you’re not a customer and haven’t experienced the service ClubUptime has to offer. Rather, you’re just someone venting steam and plugging Quickweb.

      February 6, 2011 @ 4:16 pm | Reply
    • I suggest you take a look at the Softlayer Master Service Agreement. You might notice that we provide the exact same SLA that they do.

      In the past four years we’ve had less than 9 minutes of downtime on their network. I highly doubt you’ll see that with Quickweb.

      False advertising, eh?

      February 6, 2011 @ 4:29 pm | Reply
      • Tom:

        I highly doubt you’ll see that with Quickweb.

        Why is that? Your DC is located in US and there DC is located on the Mars?

        Brilliant logic right there, thank God you can’t edit what you just said.

        February 6, 2011 @ 4:33 pm | Reply
        • Softlayer has proven themselves to be one of the most stable providers in the United States. You’re trying to twist my words around.

          I’m done arguing with you — you’re a libelous waste of time.

          February 6, 2011 @ 4:38 pm | Reply
    • The last set of comments I’ll make towards your libelous and defamatory post –

      I’d love for you to find another budget VPS provider with our uptime history and/or our history of stable servers. We don’t allow Ventrillo or Teamspeak servers for a reason — we’ve found them to be a huge cause of trouble when a client doesn’t know how to use them and configure them accordingly. Unfortunately, the Budget VPS market tends to attract more people that aren’t knowledgeable than those who are. We’ve had countless instances of clients that start up a Ventrillo server, don’t secure, and then overage their bandwidth by terabytes worth of data. We don’t suspend clients for bandwidth — we bill for it. I’d love to see you recover 3-10tb of bandwidth overage costs from an international client.

      The same goes for VNC. In addition, every last client that has purchased our services and used VNC has done so to pirate movies or other content. Not one of them has done otherwise.

      Rather than beat around the bush and offer a service that’s unreliable and unstable, we decided that we would focus it more towards being a stable service at a reasonable cost that’s geared towards web hosting.

      You can bash us all you like — We have never had a single complaint about server performance, network performance, or overall satisfaction that wasn’t fixed within seconds of receiving a support ticket.

      February 6, 2011 @ 4:37 pm | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

        So people that buys budget VPSs are dumb? (Considering Cancelling)

        February 6, 2011 @ 7:05 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

          Since it would be the smart thing todo :) {Pun Intended}

          February 6, 2011 @ 7:06 pm | Reply
        • circus:

          He said “tends to attract more people that aren’t knowledgeable than those who are” not necessarily dumb :D ie: people who use the vps for learning/experimenting (so he/she probably don’t know the right configuration yet)

          February 6, 2011 @ 7:17 pm | Reply
        • Christian:

          You should not take everything personally I think.

          February 6, 2011 @ 8:20 pm | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

        I used VNC 5x on your servers, and I did NOT use it for Pirating.

        February 6, 2011 @ 7:08 pm | Reply
  12. Tom:

    I’d like you to find me a complaint about us overselling and link me to it. I guarantee you won’t.

    Sure, just write some magical program that would should how much openvz providers oversell there RAM, and to notice performance overselling with you only allowing shared hosting-like resource usage would surely be hard.

    Rather, you’re just someone venting steam and plugging Quickweb.

    Thank God LEA isn’t getting paid by people like to remove comments that they don’t like to see from others. And if you can’t take public opinion from the side, then don’t send your offers to this blog, go start a real advertising campaign and pay for each visitor to your website.

    February 6, 2011 @ 4:27 pm | Reply
    • I asked you to find a complaint about overselling relating to ClubUptime. I take it you can’t.

      February 6, 2011 @ 4:35 pm | Reply
  13. While I also find the TOS to be a little restrictive, I have seen no evidence of overselling with ClubUptime. I was actually in violation of their TOS and didn’t realize it until seeing this thread, so I submitted a ticket to bring it to their attention intending to migrate to another provider if they requested me to.

    Matthew reviewed my vps statistics history and told me that he doesn’t have a problem with my resource usage. I try to be careful not to exceed the guaranteed RAM on my vps too often but I do push the edge consistently so I’m sure I’m not what an overseller would consider an ideal customer. The performance also doesn’t match what I have seen from oversellers – out of six budget providers I have tried only enscloud and clubuptime are capable of running a minecraft server to my satisfaction.

    February 6, 2011 @ 8:09 pm | Reply
    • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

      I should contact them about my Minecraft Server as well, myn never goes past my guaranteed ram (2GB) and I also have what recourses it can use limited, but sometimes can just notch up a bit on the CPU, then drop.

      February 7, 2011 @ 7:34 am | Reply
      • Hi Daniel,

        As long as it never exceeds its resource allowance, we won’t have a problem with it. If you could submit a ticket with your server details, one of us will look everything over and give you the okay to run it. =)

        February 7, 2011 @ 10:40 am | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

          Submitted

          THN-144-56747

          February 7, 2011 @ 6:07 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

          Thanks Andrew!

          February 7, 2011 @ 8:09 pm | Reply
    • Richard Luther:

      I guess it was too much to expect that the decent performance for such a low price could last. A few days after I posted above performance started degrading significantly so I submitted a ticket – their response was to suspend my vps without warning, until I reminded Andrew that Matthew had approved my minecraft server. Performance has continued to degrade since, to the point that the server is now unplayable, but I have been reluctant to submit another ticket since the last one resulted in a suspension.

      My minecraft server is now happily purring away better than ever on a shiny new buyvm vps.

      March 6, 2011 @ 8:38 am | Reply
      • Keep in mind — We clearly sent out an email to every last client of ours stating that we do not permit Minecraft servers to be hosted on our network several weeks ago. Since we stopped allowing them, the performance on our servers has gone right back up to as if they were brand new.

        As stated countless times — even within this thread — Java/Minecraft does NOT get along well with OpenVZ. It causes massive hard disk slashing and other issues that simply can’t be overlooked. That’s why we only permit it on our Xen platform.

        March 7, 2011 @ 5:37 pm | Reply
        • Richard Luther:

          Minecraft/java gets along perfectly fine on openvz provided you have enough RAM to allocate everything java asks for, my server with the exact same settings ran well at clubuptime initially and is running brilliantly at another openvz provider right now. Since you started your pogrom against minecraft servers, presumably my server was one of the very few on that node and yet performance continued to decline to the point the server was no longer usable.

          Time to stop looking for scapegoats and call it what it is – minecraft is not your problem.

          March 7, 2011 @ 6:55 pm | Reply
  14. Hello.

    Any chance for a Debian Squeeze (minimal install, only SSH) in the near future ?

    Regards,
    /Sorin

    February 7, 2011 @ 7:56 am | Reply
  15. Adam:

    Can we have ANY hints at all about the upcoming Gameserver VPS service? Pricing? Xen virtualization? I can’t bear to wait 9 days. :P

    February 7, 2011 @ 4:37 pm | Reply
    • Well, I’ll give you a bit of a taste.

      It will be Xen PVM based with a choice of the “standard” operating systems (CentOS, Ubuntu, etc…).

      Pricing will start at $14.95/month for 386MB Ram, 20GB disk, and 250GB Bandwidth. All resources offered will be 100% dedicated — nothing will be shared. Well, with the exception of hard disks.

      February 8, 2011 @ 6:14 am | Reply
  16. Joe jackson:

    I like how you talk about minecraft servers. Ive been running minecraft servers since alpha. All my boxs are monitored and the only one time that it really lagged the whole node. Was when hmod the old minecraft server wrapper had a unstable release and it overused tons of cpu. But since bukkit the new server wrapper is out it barley even uses cpu. Its more ram wise and for the network speed it doesnt take that much ive ran a 40 slot server on a 5mbs capt connection without any lag. The only time you will have some issues is when a 14 years old runs a server and has no idea what hes doing and adding tons of plugins that are outdated etc.

    February 7, 2011 @ 7:50 pm | Reply
    • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

      Bukkit is REALLY REALLY messy,

      I use hMod, and I have a CPU limiter and set it to 40%, and have the Java limited to using 1.5GB of RAM, and I have 2GB Guaranteed and 4GB Burst.

      February 7, 2011 @ 8:09 pm | Reply
    • OpenVZ and Java do NOT getting along together well at all. Minecraft and the way it’s developed causes extreme hard disk slashing on the OpenVZ platform, hence why we don’t allow it on our OpenVZ servers. You’re more than welcome to run it on our Xen platform, but keep it away from our OpenVZ servers :)

      Our platforms are designed more for those who intend to run actual websites, not game servers. We want to provide a fast and stable platform for those who have outgrown the world of shared hosting but have not yet justified that of a dedicated server.

      February 21, 2011 @ 6:20 pm | Reply
  17. Harbinger:

    Not sure if its coincidence or not, but since the email about minecraft on Thursday, the IO wait average has been dropping steadily, over the last 7 days it is 1.72%, last 5 mins 0.05%

    On a side note I am happy to have a restrictive TOS, as all I want to do is serve webpages.

    February 13, 2011 @ 1:12 am | Reply
    • It’s not coincidence. We had some servers have performance increases of over 400% simply because of the fact that people didn’t read our TOS.

      February 21, 2011 @ 6:23 pm | Reply
      • Harbinger:

        Well in a couple of weeks the i/o wait has doubled and rises everyday.

        Uptime

        24 days 22 hours 28 minutes

        Load

        0.09 0.25 0.38

        Memory

        Privvmpages : 1043 / 4092 M (25%) [5690]
        Oomguarpages : 559 / 2048 M (27%)
        Swapped : 64 M

        IO Wait

        Since boot : 3.77%
        Last 5 mins : 12.32%

        March 2, 2011 @ 9:44 pm | Reply
        • Well, you should open a ticket with us then :)

          This isn’t our support desk — any IOWait issues need to be resolved at our helpdesk, not lowendbox.com ;)

          March 3, 2011 @ 3:58 am | Reply
  18. Andy:

    Horrible service, slow disk IO wait.

    Not recommended.

    February 13, 2011 @ 2:38 am | Reply
    • If you’re receiving slow disk IOWait times and horrible service, would it be a good idea to submit a ticket and let us know what you think?

      February 14, 2011 @ 11:50 pm | Reply
    • Harbinger:

      @ Andy

      Can you show me a provider on LEB better than clupuptime?

      Their performance IMO is far better than budget, and their prices are/were too cheap for what they offer.

      February 15, 2011 @ 12:06 am | Reply
      • Not only that, but the average disk speed from within a VPS is over 120MB/s. Our Xen platform sees nearly 300MB/s. Try getting that with the competition while paying budget rates…

        February 21, 2011 @ 6:16 pm | Reply
  19. dhiet:

    i get different spec from offer, also seem they cannot activated tun\tap device, very confused… :)

    February 14, 2011 @ 4:47 am | Reply
    • tun/tap on Openvz can be a real pain in the a$$, must openVZ hosts dont even offer it…
      if really you need tun/tap then you need to get a XEN VPS, it works flawlessly on XEN.

      February 15, 2011 @ 8:44 pm | Reply
    • We do offer TUN/TAP and activate it on all accounts when requested. If you received different specifications, simply let us know: We’ll fix it.

      February 21, 2011 @ 6:16 pm | Reply
  20. Bob:

    I signed up a few days ago, and I’ve been happy with them so far. Speeds seem good, and I’ve only seen one incident of IO lag.

    Support was very fast at fixing a provisioning issue. It’s the only problem I’ve had so far (thanks Matthew!).

    Their management portals could use a bit of work on better integration. There are currently 3 different sites to manage billing, support and configuration. While there are links to the billing and support systems in the members area, the only link to the config site was hidden away in the provisioning email.

    One caveat is that they have now dropped the memory allowances across all tiers. Level 1 went from 512/1GB to 256/384 which brings them in line with most of the other offers I see on LEB.

    February 14, 2011 @ 4:52 am | Reply
    • Draetheus:

      Oh wow, you’re right. Memory halved across the board on budget plans.

      February 14, 2011 @ 5:50 am | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk.com:

        Yep, glad im on their old plans but hope I can keep it.

        They also increased their diskspace.

        February 14, 2011 @ 7:27 am | Reply
        • Everyone who signed up before the plans were changed will be able to keep it that way for the life of those servers. :)

          February 14, 2011 @ 11:51 pm | Reply
    • Tom:

      Nothing new, same tactic as nordicvps had, get some free advertising, get a few client and then increase the prices, if I remember correctly it was 5.95$ for 512mb now 8.95$, though hetzner dedicated servers didn’t increase price by 1$.

      February 14, 2011 @ 8:09 am | Reply
      • You’ve crawled back out of the woodwork I see. Now you’re repeating things that others have already said but without any qualification since you’re not, nor have you ever been a ClubUptime customer. Why has our refusal to host game servers and voice servers brought so much vitriol out of you?

        February 14, 2011 @ 11:55 pm | Reply
  21. dhiet:

    Ups.. just in few minute my 5 support tickets has been resolved. thank you Matthew Rosenblatt, keep it up.. :)

    February 14, 2011 @ 5:27 am | Reply
  22. Sandman:

    Ok looks like the Gameservers haven’t been launched, but they have launched Xen and Managed Xen plans

    February 15, 2011 @ 2:44 pm | Reply
    • The gameserver plans are a part of our Xen plans. Our Xen platform allows for Gameservers to be run. We do NOT allow Gameservers to be run on our OpenVZ platform.

      February 21, 2011 @ 6:24 pm | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

        The RAM you give on your gameserver VPS, on your lowest plan ($15), thats enough to run around 6 slots, where I can perhaps buy a managed game server from somewhere and for $15 get 15 slots.

        February 21, 2011 @ 7:45 pm | Reply
  23. I’m really linking this company.

    My Review:
    Their server is ok, Disk IO is very good, network latency is excellent, even from Asia.
    Maybe my server is too new and there are not many customers in there.
    But the impression is that it’s an excellent deal.

    I got impressive results for a 512MB, 1 CPU Core, server


    # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 9.46466 s, 113 MB/s

    That is superb!


    # openssl speed aes
    type 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 bytes
    aes-128 cbc 87601.06k 125961.27k 123301.55k 114144.60k 117162.04k
    aes-192 cbc 83887.47k 98011.82k 106542.34k 98440.53k 97435.32k
    aes-256 cbc 94166.44k 88410.30k 102379.67k 102423.21k 100904.07k

    I hope it stays like that fast for a long time.

    I like the idea of blocking Gaming, Torrents, P2P, Ventrillo, VNC. It keeps their server good for what I need it for, which is hosting sites!

    Also having 1 CPU core makes it fair for the price and avoid CPU hogging suckers.

    Keep up the good work Matthew.

    February 15, 2011 @ 8:32 pm | Reply
  24. you guys have a big potential.
    if you keep the servers fast and stable and with not many customers on a host, you will definitely build up a strong customer base.

    Linode has a monitoring that accounts for CPU and Disk IO, it checks for threshold over time and throttles down the domU. that is why their servers are (almost) never down or slow.

    if you could come up with something like that, which will allow your dom0 to perform well… that will be the key to success.

    I once wrote a ruby script that checks if the domU are using too much CPU and disk IO.

    February 15, 2011 @ 8:56 pm | Reply
  25. Jeromy L:

    I just wanted to update this thread with my experince with ClubUptime.

    I ordered my VPS last night after reading through this site for a bit and have been really impressed with Andrew and ClubUptime. I woke up this morning to my VPS being provisioned but I didn’t have my RAM increased. Sent an email to their sales address and within 3 minutes, a ticket was opened, ram upgraded and ticket closed. I can’t even get my wife to do things that fast! :)

    Both bandwidth speed and cpu speeds have been very quick but this being my first VPS i don’t have anything to compare to besides my own corporate VMware clusters w/ iSCSI SAN that I manage.

    February 17, 2011 @ 5:47 pm | Reply
    • We’re glad to see that you’re happy :)

      We don’t use iSCSI on most of our servers. We do on a few Dallas nodes for testing since the Dal05 datacenter has 2gbps private network connectivity on our servers. We try pretty hard to keep our clients happy :)

      February 17, 2011 @ 10:54 pm | Reply
  26. Andrew:

    Just signed up with a VPS and they were lighting fast in getting it set up. Fastest ever provisioning and support ticket reply I’ve ever seen! Keep up the great work.

    February 21, 2011 @ 3:54 pm | Reply
  27. Fenne:

    They’re just great, but I experienced some issues like:
    – this night they did reboot (and i don’t know why)
    – my HyperVM still shows 10GB/100GB (i don’t have doubled space/transfer)
    except for the above – everything is just great, no overselling, stable machines. I’d recommend :)

    February 21, 2011 @ 4:06 pm | Reply
    • http://updates.clubuptime.com/

      We had one server that had OpenVZ restarted to correct IPv6 issues as noted above :)

      If your account is not reflecting the proper information, simply contact us and let us know. We’ll be more than happy to fix it.

      February 21, 2011 @ 10:27 pm | Reply
      • Fenne:

        If everything goes as easy and good as now I’ll stay with ClubUptime for a very long time :)
        No server crashes (yeah, it’s true – i didn’t read updates.clubuptime.com), no overselling, excellent support, outstanding!

        February 21, 2011 @ 11:41 pm | Reply
      • Fenne:

        Well, what could I say after 2 months: everything is excellent (server is fast, no overselling, no minor issues) except for the uptime. I’ve had 3 reboots during 2 months.
        Apart from not having so high uptime, everything is just perfect, I can still recommend Clubuptime (I had tested a lot of VPS providers before and I didn’t have positive feelings a month after:))

        March 23, 2011 @ 12:19 pm | Reply
  28. David:

    I have a few VPS with Clubuptime and they are great and they have great support. The boxes I have work very good, no wait issues or speed issues like I have had with other VPS providers. I was sad to see the huge % drop on memory for VPS, I am shopping for another box but need enough memory to do things.. why such a huge drop :(

    February 21, 2011 @ 10:17 pm | Reply
    • If you contact us, we still might be able to help you. ;)

      February 22, 2011 @ 10:37 am | Reply
  29. Level 1 seems only 256MB guaranteed ram.

    February 21, 2011 @ 11:55 pm | Reply
    • See the comments from here — they have reduce the package specification after the sale.

      February 22, 2011 @ 12:12 am | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

        Their VPSs are now also slower then my previous Virpus VPS, its just so slow.

        I do run a Minecraft Server though with their permission, but I have a CPU limiter on it, and even when it isnt running it goes slow.

        February 22, 2011 @ 12:26 am | Reply
        • Could you provide proof and/or have you opened a ticket with regards to this? We’ve had absolutely no complaints about speeds since we’ve cracked down on Minecraft users on our nodes – this is the first we’ve heard of anything. Do you have a Ticket ID Number?

          February 22, 2011 @ 12:48 am | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          I haven’t opened a ticket, SSH and connectivity is slow.

          February 22, 2011 @ 1:09 am | Reply
        • Could you provide a traceroute or other diagnostics? Your VPS is located on a network with over 240gbps throughput available to it. The Softlayer network is known specifically for having the best connectivity throughout the US, UK, South America, and Asia.

          If you provide us with diagnostics, we may be able to resolve the claims. But, right now all of our servers are performing optimally and in doing speed tests (which we perform hourly), I can pull 500mbps+ out of each node with ease.

          February 22, 2011 @ 1:11 am | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          Daniel-Smiths-MacBook-Pro:~ Daniel$ traceroute rapiddeskapp.com
          traceroute to rapiddeskapp.com (50.22.4.117), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
          1 10.0.1.1 (10.0.1.1) 2.015 ms 0.832 ms 1.229 ms
          2 my.router (192.168.1.1) 2.455 ms 1.080 ms 1.666 ms
          3 217.47.93.250 (217.47.93.250) 28.905 ms 29.239 ms 30.269 ms
          4 217.47.90.161 (217.47.90.161) 28.603 ms 28.277 ms 30.236 ms
          5 213.1.69.2 (213.1.69.2) 28.967 ms 29.362 ms 30.960 ms
          6 213.120.176.22 (213.120.176.22) 28.452 ms 29.268 ms 29.276 ms
          7 213.120.176.178 (213.120.176.178) 29.266 ms 29.554 ms 29.275 ms
          8 acc1-10gige-0-1-0-4.l-far.21cn-ipp.bt.net (109.159.249.70) 29.681 ms
          acc1-10gige-0-2-0-5.l-far.21cn-ipp.bt.net (109.159.249.99) 29.820 ms
          acc1-10gige-0-0-0-4.l-far.21cn-ipp.bt.net (109.159.249.66) 32.836 ms
          9 core1-te0-4-0-6.ealing.ukcore.bt.net (109.159.249.1) 29.936 ms
          core1-te0-11-5-0.ealing.ukcore.bt.net (109.159.249.5) 30.768 ms
          core1-te0-4-0-6.ealing.ukcore.bt.net (109.159.249.1) 29.678 ms
          10 transit1-xe0-0-0.ealing.ukcore.bt.net (62.6.200.106) 29.813 ms 29.953 ms 30.164 ms
          11 t2c1-ge14-0-0.uk-eal.eu.bt.net (166.49.168.25) 31.280 ms 30.104 ms 30.382 ms
          12 t2c1-p4-0-0.us-ash.eu.bt.net (166.49.164.225) 106.200 ms 106.552 ms 106.687 ms
          13 te3-5.bbr01.eq01.wdc01.networklayer.com (206.223.115.185) 105.220 ms 104.395 ms 103.497 ms
          14 po3.bbr02.tl01.atl01.networklayer.com (173.192.18.153) 116.942 ms 117.498 ms 116.749 ms
          15 * * *
          16 ae7.bbr01.eq01.dal03.networklayer.com (173.192.18.208) 153.389 ms
          ae5.dar02.sr01.dal05.networklayer.com (173.192.18.217) 138.103 ms 138.908 ms
          17 * * *
          18 po1.fcr01.sr01.dal05.networklayer.com (173.192.118.131) 228.621 ms 150.411 ms 143.930 ms
          19 dalvz1.serverprovision.net (173.192.121.67) 139.312 ms 139.021 ms 139.385 ms
          20 xebec.rapiddeskapp.com (50.22.4.117) 150.282 ms 150.664 ms 151.426 ms
          Daniel-Smiths-MacBook-Pro:~ Daniel$ ping rapiddeskapp.com
          PING rapiddeskapp.com (50.22.4.117): 56 data bytes
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=0 ttl=44 time=152.084 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=1 ttl=44 time=152.811 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=2 ttl=44 time=150.082 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=3 ttl=44 time=152.564 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=4 ttl=44 time=151.579 ms
          ^C
          --- rapiddeskapp.com ping statistics ---
          5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
          round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 150.082/151.824/152.811/0.968 ms
          Daniel-Smiths-MacBook-Pro:~ Daniel$

          When I write something in SSH, it takes around 5 seconds for it to appear in the Terminal window, sometimes even my wordpress blog hosted at http://www.rapiddeskapp.com/ takes ages to load and its PHP files are only a few kbs.

          February 22, 2011 @ 10:02 am | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          Also originally on Cachefly Speedtest I used to be able to pull at 80mbps, now i’m lucky to get 20mbps.

          February 22, 2011 @ 10:07 am | Reply
        • I didn’t hit reply on my last comments, so just scroll down to the bottom of the page to read them.

          I just ran some tests on the hardware —

          [root@dalvz1 ~]# wget cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
          --2011-02-22 04:09:05-- http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
          Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net... 205.234.175.175
          Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
          HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
          Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
          Saving to: `100mb.test'

          100%[==============================================================================================================================================================================================>] 104,857,600 69.8M/s in 1.4s

          69.8M/s is 558.4mbps. That's over half a gigabit per second from cachefly right into the node you're on.

          From within your VPS, I’m seeing about 60MB/s (480mbps), or just under half a gigabit per second from cache fly. The slight difference is to be expected as all VPS’s are somewhat throttled on disk I/O.


          root@HIDDEN_FOR_SECURITY:/# wget cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
          --2011-02-22 10:11:24-- http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
          Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net... 205.234.175.175
          Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
          HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
          Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
          Saving to: `100mb.test.2'

          100%[==============================================================================================================================================================================================>] 104,857,600 60.8M/s in 1.6s

          Below are some ping results from several geographical locations all showing above-average results:


          From London, UK
          root@london [~]# ping -c 100 50.22.4.117
          PING 50.22.4.117 (50.22.4.117) 56(84) bytes of data.
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=1 ttl=47 time=107 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=2 ttl=47 time=107 ms
          ………………………………..
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=99 ttl=47 time=107 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=100 ttl=47 time=107 ms

          --- 50.22.4.117 ping statistics ---
          100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 99042ms
          rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 106.719/107.457/108.070/0.466 ms

          From Chicago Illinois
          [root@chicago ~]# ping -c 100 50.22.4.117
          PING 50.22.4.117 (50.22.4.117) 56(84) bytes of data.
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=24.8 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=24.7 ms
          ………………………………..
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=99 ttl=54 time=24.8 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=100 ttl=54 time=24.5 ms

          --- 50.22.4.117 ping statistics ---
          100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 98983ms
          rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 24.323/24.895/31.355/0.809 ms

          From Washington DC
          [root@wdc ~]# ping -c 100 50.22.4.117
          PING 50.22.4.117 (50.22.4.117) 56(84) bytes of data.
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=34.0 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=34.0 ms
          ………………………………..
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=99 ttl=56 time=33.9 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=100 ttl=56 time=34.0 ms

          --- 50.22.4.117 ping statistics ---
          100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 99005ms
          rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 33.895/34.021/34.413/0.242 ms

          From Seattle, Washington
          [root@seattle ~]# ping -c 100 50.22.4.117
          PING 50.22.4.117 (50.22.4.117) 56(84) bytes of data.
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=41.8 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=41.8 ms
          ………………………………..
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=99 ttl=56 time=41.8 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=100 ttl=56 time=41.9 ms

          --- 50.22.4.117 ping statistics ---
          100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 99032ms
          rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 41.798/41.928/42.593/0.215 ms

          From Dallas, Texas
          [root@dallas ~]# ping -c 100 50.22.4.117
          PING 50.22.4.117 (50.22.4.117) 56(84) bytes of data.
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.257 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=2 ttl=63 time=0.252 ms
          ………………………………..
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=99 ttl=63 time=0.153 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=100 ttl=63 time=0.190 ms

          --- 50.22.4.117 ping statistics ---
          100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 99012ms
          rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.145/0.245/0.865/0.117 ms

          From South Florida
          southflorida$ ping -c 100 50.22.4.117
          PING 50.22.4.117 (50.22.4.117): 56 data bytes
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=0 ttl=51 time=54.375 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=53.003 ms
          ………………………………..
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=98 ttl=51 time=49.261 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=99 ttl=51 time=48.474 ms

          --- 50.22.4.117 ping statistics ---
          100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
          round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 45.799/49.312/90.461/4.496 ms

          And for good measure, one from a BurstNET VPS in Scranton --
          root@scranton [~]# ping -c 100 50.22.4.117
          PING 50.22.4.117 (50.22.4.117) 56(84) bytes of data.
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=43.5 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=42.9 ms
          ………………………………..
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=99 ttl=55 time=43.2 ms
          64 bytes from 50.22.4.117: icmp_seq=100 ttl=55 time=43.5 ms

          --- 50.22.4.117 ping statistics ---
          100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 99072ms
          rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 42.655/43.366/44.153/0.400 ms

          Traceroutes are available from each location upon request.

          February 22, 2011 @ 10:30 am | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          I wasen’t getting 60mbps a sec a few hours ago,

          my internet routes through London, (Ealing, so I should be getting better pings.

          February 22, 2011 @ 10:39 am | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          The MB , mb thing is confusing.

          February 22, 2011 @ 10:41 am | Reply
        • 1MB = 1 MegaByte
          1mb = 1 Megabit
          1 Megabyte = 8 Megabits as there are 8 bits to a byte.

          For example, 10MB/s is 80Megabits per second (mbps).

          February 22, 2011 @ 10:43 am | Reply
  30. From what I’m seeing there, your latency exists on the hop “t2c1-p4-0-0.us-ash.eu.bt.net”, before the datacenter. It’s the hop before the handoff to Softlayer. There’s nothing that we’d be able to do about that — that’s the route that bt.net is deciding to put you on.

    February 22, 2011 @ 10:03 am | Reply
    • Actually, in this case, that’s expected — It’s a transatlantic UK->US Handoff.

      I’ll pass this along to Softlayer regardless. Right now they’re performing network maintenance in Dal05, however, so that could be the cause of the added 100ms latency around hop 18.

      February 22, 2011 @ 10:05 am | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

        Them cables are supposed to be super fast that they can handle the entire internet by themselves if they did.

        Switching ISP here wouldn’t fix the problem, (which you can do in other countries), BT own pretty much the entire network, and other ISPs just use BTs network.

        February 22, 2011 @ 10:18 am | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

        Heres the Unix Bench

        BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.2)

        System: xebec: GNU/Linux
        OS: GNU/Linux — 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5.028stab070.14 — #1 SMP Thu Nov 18 16:34:01 MSK 2010
        Machine: i686 (unknown)
        Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap=”ANSI_X3.4-1968″, collate=”ANSI_X3.4-1968″)
        CPU 0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X3470 @ 2.93GHz (5866.9 bogomips)
        Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
        CPU 1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X3470 @ 2.93GHz (5866.6 bogomips)
        Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
        CPU 2: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X3470 @ 2.93GHz (5866.6 bogomips)
        Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
        CPU 3: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X3470 @ 2.93GHz (5866.7 bogomips)
        Hyper-Threading, x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET, Intel virtualization
        09:58:19 up 8 days, 22:31, 1 user, load average: 0.10, 0.12, 0.20; runlevel 2

        ————————————————————————
        Benchmark Run: Tue Feb 22 2011 09:58:19 – 10:30:49
        4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests

        Dhrystone 2 using register variables 13674878.6 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Double-Precision Whetstone 2762.5 MWIPS (7.6 s, 7 samples)
        Execl Throughput 4126.6 lps (30.1 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 520150.5 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 145005.9 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1134689.2 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        Pipe Throughput 834279.4 lps (10.1 s, 7 samples)
        Pipe-based Context Switching 43380.5 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Process Creation 13168.8 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 9061.8 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
        Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 2576.0 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
        System Call Overhead 689736.0 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)

        System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX
        Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 13674878.6 1171.8
        Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 2762.5 502.3
        Execl Throughput 43.0 4126.6 959.7
        File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 520150.5 1313.5
        File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 145005.9 876.2
        File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1134689.2 1956.4
        Pipe Throughput 12440.0 834279.4 670.6
        Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 43380.5 108.5
        Process Creation 126.0 13168.8 1045.1
        Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 9061.8 2137.2
        Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 2576.0 4293.4
        System Call Overhead 15000.0 689736.0 459.8
        ========
        System Benchmarks Index Score 928.0

        ————————————————————————
        Benchmark Run: Tue Feb 22 2011 10:30:49 – 11:03:20
        4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests

        Dhrystone 2 using register variables 49911377.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Double-Precision Whetstone 11530.0 MWIPS (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Execl Throughput 14655.5 lps (29.6 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 563577.2 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 150385.0 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1620022.9 KBps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        Pipe Throughput 3353416.3 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Pipe-based Context Switching 1031977.8 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)
        Process Creation 44726.7 lps (30.0 s, 2 samples)
        Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 30671.4 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
        Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 3873.9 lpm (60.0 s, 2 samples)
        System Call Overhead 2782702.1 lps (10.0 s, 7 samples)

        System Benchmarks Index Values BASELINE RESULT INDEX
        Dhrystone 2 using register variables 116700.0 49911377.1 4276.9
        Double-Precision Whetstone 55.0 11530.0 2096.4
        Execl Throughput 43.0 14655.5 3408.3
        File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 563577.2 1423.2
        File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 150385.0 908.7
        File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 1620022.9 2793.1
        Pipe Throughput 12440.0 3353416.3 2695.7
        Pipe-based Context Switching 4000.0 1031977.8 2579.9
        Process Creation 126.0 44726.7 3549.7
        Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 42.4 30671.4 7233.8
        Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 3873.9 6456.6
        System Call Overhead 15000.0 2782702.1 1855.1
        ========
        System Benchmarks Index Score 2803.9

        I just remembered im using the 32bit Debian, when my VPS has 2GB (4GB BURST) RAM on 64bit hardware, perhaps thats the reason why its slow.

        February 22, 2011 @ 11:04 am | Reply
        • asf:

          @Daniel
          ~150ms from UK? This seems very strange.

          Here is traceroute from South-East Europe…

          1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms x.x.x.x
          2 6 ms 7 ms 7 ms 93.86.220.1
          3 7 ms 7 ms 9 ms 212.200.15.65
          4 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms 212.200.6.186
          5 15 ms 14 ms 14 ms 213.248.82.157
          6 22 ms 21 ms 21 ms 80.91.250.66
          7 40 ms 40 ms 40 ms 80.91.246.26
          8 120 ms 260 ms 122 ms 80.91.247.123
          9 202 ms 165 ms 166 ms 213.155.130.67
          10 157 ms 158 ms 159 ms 213.248.102.174
          11 160 ms 160 ms 161 ms 173.192.18.217
          12 190 ms 191 ms 191 ms 173.192.118.128
          13 187 ms 211 ms 186 ms 173.192.118.131
          14 161 ms 161 ms 161 ms 173.192.121.67
          15 183 ms 187 ms 177 ms 50.22.4.x

          Ping statistics for 50.22.4.x:
          Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
          Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
          Minimum = 174ms, Maximum = 178ms, Average = 176ms

          Cachefly:
          2011-02-22 12:24:53 (80.9 MB/s) – `100mb.test' saved [104857600/104857600]

          ps. I am also on that node… and there is no significant "performance" degradation in last 30+ days. Node is very snappy…

          February 22, 2011 @ 11:30 am | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

        WGET from my location

        Daniel-Smiths-MacBook-Pro:~ Daniel$ wget http://www.ripwindowsphone.com/100mb.test
        --2011-02-22 11:12:20--  http://www.ripwindowsphone.com/100mb.test
        Resolving www.ripwindowsphone.com (www.ripwindowsphone.com)... 50.22.4.117
        Connecting to www.ripwindowsphone.com (www.ripwindowsphone.com)|50.22.4.117|:80... connected.
        HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
        Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream]
        Saving to: `100mb.test'
        
        100%[======================================>] 104,857,600  422K/s   in 4m 29s  
        
        2011-02-22 11:16:50 (380 KB/s) - `100mb.test' saved [104857600/104857600]
        
        February 22, 2011 @ 11:26 am | Reply
  31. Fred:

    Daniel
    just a hint
    try openvpn, install tunnelblick on your mac, then ssh to 10.8.0.1 or whatever is the server ip on your openvpn config file.
    if it’s really a bad router in between your and your server, then use an ssh tunnel on another server to skip that router.
    I do that all the time when im traveling…

    February 22, 2011 @ 10:08 am | Reply
    • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

      I have http://proxpn.com/ installed (it also uses TunnelBrick), and see if it changes any hops.

      February 22, 2011 @ 10:12 am | Reply
  32. Draetheus:

    Is the double bandwidth and disk increase applicable for the new plans?

    February 23, 2011 @ 3:53 am | Reply
    • The only thing it doesn’t apply to is disk space on our Xen platform as disk space, memory, and CPU time are fully scheduled and dedicated to each user.

      February 25, 2011 @ 6:03 am | Reply
  33. Thank you ClubUptime. Already I get my account.

    And CU is promise five nines up-time guarantee. I am also happy CU service.

    Thanks again.

    March 1, 2011 @ 4:22 pm | Reply
  34. Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

    I just got harassed from their support for saying Windows Server is a fail platform.

    March 3, 2011 @ 6:26 pm | Reply
    • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

      I only renewed yesterday, will I renew next month. No.

      March 3, 2011 @ 6:26 pm | Reply
    • Harassed? If you’re going to make defamatory statements, I’d certainly hope you can back them up.

      March 3, 2011 @ 6:28 pm | Reply
      • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

        Yep, screenshotted :)

        oh Sorry, Im dumb at the internet as you make out.

        http://grab.by/9gRI

        March 3, 2011 @ 6:29 pm | Reply
        • Take it as you please. It’s too bad you didn’t post a URL to the thread so the public could see the rest of your arrogance.

          So, here it is :)

          http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1027&t=205904

          You did nothing but publicly bash a company that competes with your own, of which happens to be a subsidiary of Club Uptime. We in no way “harassed” you.

          March 3, 2011 @ 6:32 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          if you look at all my previous post, i hate and post that on every company that uses Windows Server.

          March 3, 2011 @ 6:33 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          Haha, I didn’t post the URL just incase you removed your post.

          March 3, 2011 @ 6:34 pm | Reply
        • We’re not removing any of our posts. We have nothing to hide. Your current behaviour speaks for itself.

          We’re done arguing over this childish rubbish.

          March 3, 2011 @ 6:35 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          Is that why your posting on a game forum thats mainly run by kids?

          I edited my post to remove my signatures, since it was my personal opinion.

          I made simply an obvious point, (that Windows server is for people who don’t know how to run a Linux Server (Which is the proper server OS))

          March 3, 2011 @ 6:37 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          Am I not entitled to my own opinion, as far as I see my opinion is not agaisn’t an individual, where yours is.

          March 3, 2011 @ 6:40 pm | Reply
        • Tom:

          I don’t understand what we should see on that forum?
          Seems like some kiddie talk and some depressed hosters trying to attract kiddies?

          March 3, 2011 @ 7:46 pm | Reply
        • WTF Daniel?! Even in the image you linked, didn’t you make comment on their technical skill first? And now you are turning around when ClubUptime replies you?

          Things you posted on the Internet do stick around for a while. And I do hope that you think about what you are saying on blogs and forums before finishing college and trying to land on a job — those might become references against you.

          March 3, 2011 @ 10:01 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          I didn’t commend on ClubUptimes technical skills.

          March 3, 2011 @ 10:27 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          Ah, I already have plans for all the comments i’ve posted on the web.

          March 3, 2011 @ 10:30 pm | Reply
      • Christian:

        @Matthew Just ignore Daniel, he tries to blame every VPS provider listed on LEB. He also ended up in the dead pool with his “company”.

        March 3, 2011 @ 7:45 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          Yep sure did.

          You seem to reply to every post I write. I post on only a few providers.

          March 3, 2011 @ 7:48 pm | Reply
  35. Phil:

    Just signed up for a $5.95 budget plan and was going within 15 minutes. In Seattle and got a Seattle VPS and speeds are excellent

    # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 6.99593 seconds, 153 MB/s

    Pulled down a M$ SP at 7.16 MB/s avg over 266MB as well

    Looking great, guys!

    March 3, 2011 @ 11:25 pm | Reply
  36. David:

    Hey guys, nice offer you got going on. I’m trying to place an order but I’m getting this error “Chrome cannot load the page”, is it just me? http://www.clubuptime.com

    March 5, 2011 @ 3:59 am | Reply
    • It’s not just you. Someone has decided to hit all of our servers with Softayer with multi-gigabit attacks over the past two hours.

      March 5, 2011 @ 4:34 am | Reply
      • Ouch. I saw the website went down and came back up on a different IP address, and wondered what happened..

        March 5, 2011 @ 12:03 pm | Reply
        • Daniel @ LowEndTalk:

          I’m happily saying that this isn’t me if your wondering

          I settled my argument with Matthew last night :)

          March 5, 2011 @ 12:27 pm | Reply
  37. Adam:

    Seems like Quickweb also got hit by DDOS attack on their Softlayer servers around same time ?

    March 5, 2011 @ 12:07 pm | Reply
    • I don’t know. We just finished getting everything back online and operational. We’re likely moving ClubUptime.com itself to Gigenet for their DDOS protection since we saw 14gbps to our primary website alone last night, not including what we saw to our other servers.

      March 5, 2011 @ 12:11 pm | Reply
      • Have any of you ever had issues with Amazon and their abuse department? A huge part of the DOS came from them (and still is), but their abuse department doesn’t seem to want anything to do with fixing it. Over 400,000 attempts at our SQL servers in the past few hours alone…

        March 5, 2011 @ 12:24 pm | Reply
  38. that is not good on Amazon part to let this DDOS happen…
    I guess it’s just so easy to get a free EC2 or even a paid one, launch it for DDOS attack then wait till it gets killed.

    bts, why dont you guys put hardware DDOS protection?
    or at least put pfsense on a 1GB vm itself. not sure if possible with OpenVZ, sure possible with XEN/KVM.

    March 5, 2011 @ 12:32 pm | Reply
    • A DDOS that’s 14gbit in size will cripple the network long before it hits the pfsense box. It costs about $750,000 in DDOS protection hardware to mitigate an attack of that size.

      A proper DDOS protection device sits BEFORE/OUTSIDE the network in line with the ISP uplinks — not inside the routed environment.

      March 5, 2011 @ 12:34 pm | Reply
  39. it all depends where you want to protect it,
    since you said you can measure the 14gb, I supposed you have access to the network to install something.

    dont under estimate pfSense. :)
    it’s really powerful and fast.
    it was just an idea to keep in mind.

    March 5, 2011 @ 12:40 pm | Reply
  40. And DDoS Attack was successful as I see… New 9 hours of downtime. 48hours, 15 hours downtime… Hope Monday is OK.

    March 6, 2011 @ 7:26 am | Reply
  41. 48 hours/25h downtime because of mass DDoS. It’s ok for me in the weekend. So I’m moving for a while just to wait when fire stops.

    March 6, 2011 @ 2:48 pm | Reply
  42. so, can you give a good reason why minecraft runs fine on XEN and should not run on OPENVZ?
    is it because you can control the IO and CPU usage of a xen VM but not doable on openvz?
    im confused here.

    I had a few spikes on IO Wait on my openvz at clubuptime, other than I guess it’s fine…
    altho im not running anything much on it, just some idle rails apps that only needs ram, but not cpu or IO.

    March 7, 2011 @ 7:01 pm | Reply
    • There are well known bugs within either Java or OpenVZ — I forget which. In most cases, it’s not a problem. However, when using certain IO calls, it can run the hard disk I/O out the roof. Multiply that by 15-20 times and the Disk I/O goes down from 150-200MB/s to 10-15MB/s.

      It’s not necessarily a problem when it’s one or to VPS’s. It becomes a major problem when it’s on many VPS’s on OpenVZ.

      After we took over Brohoster last week, we rolled out a few new servers for Minecraft only: We can easily place 100 minecraft servers per physical host simply because it’s not virtualized. Good luck doing that in OpenVZ. After 5-10 servers, your hard drives will start taking a large dump on themselves.

      In the end, we just stopped allowing it. We would much rather our VPS servers be used for virtual hosts. Most of our clients use them for WordPress, Magento, and other uses. Allowing Minecraft just left those users running poorly, which we don’t want.

      March 7, 2011 @ 7:06 pm | Reply
    • Richard Luther:

      Simply being on xen is no guarantee that minecraft will run well – I tried out a xen vps from Hostmist and discovered that it is indeed possible to oversell xen too. I had far better performance from clubuptime openvz before they oversold the node I was on, and am currently getting excellent performance from buyvm openvz.

      March 7, 2011 @ 7:06 pm | Reply
      • You can oversell Xen if you have the ballooning drivers installed. We don’t dive into Ballooning. Our plans are setup like building blocks. That’s why they’re somewhat more restrictive and strict than the OpenVZ plans. I’ve never tried running Minecraft in Xen, but we have several clients that do and they’ve got nothing but positive things to say: Especially since the Xen platform isn’t oversold at all. CPU time and RAM is 100% dedicated/guaranteed at all times.

        March 7, 2011 @ 7:08 pm | Reply
      • Also keep in mind that Ballooning is generally designed for Cloud Computing environments operating in HVA mode for high availability. If a host node goes down, having ballooning enabled makes it much easier for OS images to be restored on other physical hosts that may or may not have enough dedicated ram available but have enough unused ram available.

        It’s original design isn’t to be relied on but to be a failover tactic.

        March 7, 2011 @ 7:10 pm | Reply
        • That’s cool. Thanks for you well explaining answer.
          you definitely know your shit well… haha.

          March 7, 2011 @ 7:14 pm | Reply
  43. Dan:

    Does this $5.95/month offer not exist anymore? I’m interested but the prices list otherwise..

    March 22, 2011 @ 8:21 pm | Reply
    • The price hasn’t existed for quite some time, unfortunately.

      In the future, you might want to contact us directly though. We’re more than happy to answer your questions :)

      March 22, 2011 @ 9:54 pm | Reply
      • Dan:

        I did get in touch with your sales team and I was given the same information. Thanks though!

        I guess I’ll wait until this offer comes back. Can’t wait!

        March 23, 2011 @ 12:46 am | Reply
  44. James:

    So if I hosted a low-resource game server I’d get booted? It does not use more then 256mb of ram and its not that CPU intensive at all. I’d want to buy a level 3 plan since it has plenty of bandwidth and ram for my needs to make sure I don’t exceed what I pay for.

    March 23, 2011 @ 10:38 am | Reply
    • The only game server applications we really care about are Minecraft. Minecraft + OpenVZ don’t get along. There are about 20 posts right here in this thread explaining that, though ;)

      March 23, 2011 @ 1:20 pm | Reply
      • James:

        I read some of them, so aslong as Im not hogging resources Im fine?

        March 24, 2011 @ 4:19 am | Reply
        • James:

          “Please Note! A Coupon Code is not required for our February 2011 “Double Up” promotion on ANY plans! The double disk space and double bandwidth will be applied automatically!” Is this still active? If so, is the offer for the first month only?

          March 24, 2011 @ 4:34 am | Reply
        • That was active for February only, so it’s no longer active.

          March 24, 2011 @ 4:37 am | Reply
  45. James:

    Yeah I figured.

    March 24, 2011 @ 7:30 am | Reply

Leave a Reply

Some notes on commenting on LowEndBox:

  • Do not use LowEndBox for support issues. Go to your hosting provider and issue a ticket there. Coming here saying "my VPS is down, what do I do?!" will only have your comments removed.
  • Akismet is used for spam detection. Quoting webhostingtalk.com URL seems to get binned consistently here, but I do peek into the spam box frequently to publish those comments.
  • Use <pre>...</pre> to quote the output from your terminal/console, or consider using a pastebin service.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <pre> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>