Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by noir_lord | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

noir_lord

I'm a recent Hetzner customer.

32Gb/i7.

I used them for 5 weeks, in that five week period I had 5 1-2 day blocks where the machine was unreachable.

>A incoming attack influence the network for few minutes. The network department has solved the issue.

few minutes was 31 hours

our network-team told us, that there was again an attack which caused the issues you mentioned.

27 hours

currently we can't see any issue, is this still given?

connection timed out (no idea how long as I'd not installed monitoring at that point).

etc etc.

I canceled shortly after.

I'm back on Linode for now (I actually changed the design of the product I'm developing so that I can store files onto S3 so I can stay with Linode and move easily in the future).

A fast server is a paperweight without reliable network access.

View on HN

Just as a counter point, I'm both a Linode and Hetzner user and am happy with both. My Hetzner server has had solid service for about 18 months now (with a couple of brief restarts in there) and certainly no prolonged outages.

I am not particularly keen to move entirely to them, however, as I just have a gut feeling I'd prefer to have the service of someone like Linode in a true emergency. As a high powered server for experiments, side projects or things that don't demand 100% uptime (e.g. my company's collaboration software), however, Hetzner has proven superb so far.

There was a true emergency with Linode.

They've been hacked badly twice and both times withheld information from their customers. Bizarre that you would prefer this type of service than from others.

i host a few sites with moderate traffic on an ex10 server. I can't remember of any network issues. Current uptime:

12:13:14 up 183 days, 21:23, 2 users, load average: 0.51, 0.55, 0.49

The problem is unreliability of hardware. When one of the hard disks broke in the previous server, it was faster to setup a new server to transfer everything rather than waiting for the repair.

I concur with the unreliability of hardware. Back in January a production Hetzer box of mine saw both HDDs die at the same time. That somewhat killed the redundancy benefit of RAID.

That said, it did spur a month-long effort to truly revamp my dusty backup-and-restore process so I'm in a much better position for when it happens again.

You're telling me swapping HDDs and letting RAID rebuild is slower than setting up the server again?!

A failed HDD should NEVER, EVER, bring a server down.

i should have mentioned that both disks reporting errors. The DNS change required less downtime than the downtime of backing up everything and setting up the servers from the start.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com