Page 12 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2910111213141522 ... LastLast
Results 276 to 300 of 816
  1. #276
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,922
    Quote Originally Posted by webgrab
    The Xen scoring is like 400% compared to a virtuozzo VPS score.
    With Virtuozzo 3.0 you will see 120+ at least from a provider knowing what they are doing. I personally have seen higher across the board on Virtuozzo 3.0. You said 185 with your Xen VPS. That is 150% percent roughly that of a Virtuozzo VPS. So 400% is just bogus. The old 2.6 Virtuozzo some scores are lower but not all of them.

    I never said Xen wasn't a nice technology but we chose Virtuozzo for Management Reasons and overall customer experience. Performance if you base it on benchmarks is not a good source of measuring how good your VPS is. The two are not similar in how they operate. Good luck.

    Thanks,
    Jay
    KnownHost Managed VPS Specialists
    Toll Free: (866)-332-9894
    Fully Managed VPS, Wordpress, Cloud Servers, and Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  2. #277
    Greetings Jay,
    Quote Originally Posted by Knownhost -J
    So 400% is just bogus
    If you please see some pages back, almost 90% or more then that virtuozzo based VPs score about ~40, mine is about 148 - if i remember well. Almost 4 times more power, in comparatively small pack, as i am on 128MB RAM. So much of ppl understand how i said 400%.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knownhost -J
    You said 185 with your Xen VPS.
    You are mistaken, I never wrote 185 on Xen VPS, Maybe you intermingled any other post/person.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knownhost -J
    Performance if you base it on benchmarks is not a good source of measuring how good your VPS is.
    Well Benchmarking is the only means to get performance measure in my knowledge - I admit I dont have much knowledge, But so many pages/posts dedicated to this benchmarking topic and providers promptly replying to benchmark results made me think its a genuine measure, I dont see any other topic regarding the performance measures of VPS. If you please know any other sort of judging VPS performance, letme know I will perform that with my system, and post my results in the forum.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knownhost -J
    we chose Virtuozzo for Management Reasons and overall customer experience.
    Choice is a personal preference, Management features in VZPP like reboot/restart is essential, as its a bursting feature needs much more frequent reboots even compared to a physical dedibox, but when speaking overall customer experience I dont see much of positive majority, Here we see ppl getting like 8~10 score from very old and famous providers, This thing makes a panic in the overall experience.
      0 Not allowed!

  3. #278
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    10,710
    Greetings webgrab ,

    If you please see some pages back, almost 90% or more then that virtuozzo based VPs score about ~40, mine is about 148 - if i remember well. Almost 4 times more power, in comparatively small pack, as i am on 128MB RAM. So much of ppl understand how i said 400%.
    Most of the scores pages back are from users on Virtuozzo 2.x, they are not on Virtuozzo 3. Virtuozzo 3 has a small footprint and overall delivers a lot better performance.

    You are mistaken, I never wrote 185 on Xen VPS, Maybe you intermingled any other post/person.
    What did you get on your Xen VPS in that case?

    Well Benchmarking is the only means to get performance measure in my knowledge - I admit I dont have much knowledge, But so many pages/posts dedicated to this benchmarking topic and providers promptly replying to benchmark results made me think its a genuine measure, I dont see any other topic regarding the performance measures of VPS. If you please know any other sort of judging VPS performance, letme know I will perform that with my system, and post my results in the forum.
    It's called real world performance. If you have a benchmark score of 2 and your sites are loading fast enough for you, then it shouldn't matter.

    Choice is a personal preference, Management features in VZPP like reboot/restart is essential, as its a bursting feature needs much more frequent reboots even compared to a physical dedibox, but when speaking overall customer experience I dont see much of positive majority, Here we see ppl getting like 8~10 score from very old and famous providers, This thing makes a panic in the overall experience.
    How does bursting require each individual VE to be rebooted more often? Care to explain?

    Hardly anybody is getting 8-10, I am seeing a lot of 30-50 and 100+ in Virtuozzo 3 scores.

    Thank you.
    MediaLayer, LLC - www.medialayer.com Learn how we can make your website load faster, translating to better conversion rates for your business!
    The pioneers of optimized web hosting, featuring LiteSpeed Web Server & SSD Storage - Celebrating 10 Years in Business
      0 Not allowed!

  4. #279
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,922
    You said 148 so my mistake. So this puts you very close to a Virtuozzo 3.0 VPS. I mean real close. A score of 8 or 10.... would be a poor performing VPS..(based on benchmarks scoring). Virtuozzo 2.6 didn't have as high of benchmarks but keep in mind not all providers configure and operate at the same level. I would suspect some Virtuozzo 3.0 benchmarks will come in sooner then later as it just came out a few weeks ago.

    Thanks,
    Jay
    KnownHost Managed VPS Specialists
    Toll Free: (866)-332-9894
    Fully Managed VPS, Wordpress, Cloud Servers, and Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  5. #280
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    10,710
    webgrab,

    Just to add to my former post,

    19:59:51 up 76 days, 21:11, 1 user, load average: 0.15, 0.05, 0.01
    That is on a VPS.

    Rebooted often? Think as you wish.

    Thank you.
    MediaLayer, LLC - www.medialayer.com Learn how we can make your website load faster, translating to better conversion rates for your business!
    The pioneers of optimized web hosting, featuring LiteSpeed Web Server & SSD Storage - Celebrating 10 Years in Business
      0 Not allowed!

  6. #281
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    3,642
    Never mind.
      0 Not allowed!

  7. #282
    Hi elix,
    . Yah, I know VZ3 has lesser overhead, I dont think lesser foorprint will make this much difference like everyperson is saying, The problem is overselling which make every VPS account leave very less resources.
    .I got like 148 on my Xen system, unixbench report on previous page.
    .real world performance, ok I go n sleep now, maybe when i awake after 8 hours i will see my pages are loaded if my score is "2". Man PHP rules, I am not a HTML only guy.
    .Burst RAM feature in VZ requires much more reboots, as when you utilise a big portion of burst RAM and at a moment when burst RAM is not available to you and only your guaranteed RAM is available, Your VPS starts bogging and the only solution is a reboot. You got it, if you go over guaranteed RAM limits more often, you naturally feel that everything is bogging. But in Xen you have Swap which gives you a different kind of treatment and you can keep without rebooting unless you need a reboot for installing a software, - Its the best of my knowledge and expertise, If i am wrong please correct me.
      0 Not allowed!

  8. #283
    ok
    Quote Originally Posted by elix
    Rebooted often? Think as you wish.
    I can only think that u r more lazy them me. Isnt it?
      0 Not allowed!

  9. #284
    VPS ID - 416 on DEHE Business VPS, 384MB Guaranteed Ram, 66$/month with cpanel/chm.

    Virtuozzo 3

    Note that site was running normally and was not disabled during tests. Site was having moderate/low load.

    Interestingly there was no slowdown for the website during the test
    ==========================================================

    Start Benchmark Run: Wed Apr 5 23:23:04 IST 2006
    23:23:04 up 12 days, 2:01, 0 users, load average: 0.51, 0.46, 0.49

    End Benchmark Run: Wed Apr 5 23:37:31 IST 2006
    23:37:31 up 12 days, 2:15, 0 users, load average: 13.48, 6.42, 3.46


    INDEX VALUES
    TEST BASELINE RESULT INDEX

    Dhrystone 2 using register variables 376783.7 8334910.2 221.2
    Double-Precision Whetstone 83.1 719.0 86.5
    Execl Throughput 188.3 1096.9 58.3
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 2672.0 85949.0 321.7
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1077.0 17649.0 163.9
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 15382.0 519841.0 338.0
    Pipe Throughput 111814.6 1276561.8 114.2
    Pipe-based Context Switching 15448.6 190108.3 123.1
    Process Creation 569.3 3159.5 55.5
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 44.8 266.8 59.6
    System Call Overhead 114433.5 1459907.8 127.6
    =========
    FINAL SCORE 125.1

    A good score I think
    Last edited by [MaxX]; 04-05-2006 at 02:18 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

  10. #285
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,922
    Since this thread primarily is focused around Xen and Virtuozzo I figured it would be good to post some news. Virtuozzo won the award at Linuxworld this week for product excellence in the "Virtualization category". Xen was in the competition along with Vmware and Virtual Iron. Have a nice day.

    -Jay
    Last edited by KnownHost; 04-06-2006 at 05:22 PM.
    KnownHost Managed VPS Specialists
    Toll Free: (866)-332-9894
    Fully Managed VPS, Wordpress, Cloud Servers, and Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  11. #286
    servint $49/mo total cPanel/WHM 200G Transfer 10GB Storage 1GB RAM Rat Hat 9.0

    Code:
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht)
    System -- Linux xxxxxx*********** 2.4.20-021stab028.19.777-enterprise #1 SMP Wed Oct 19 13:05:01 MSD 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
    /dev/vzfs             31457280  20139644  11317636  65% /
    
    Start Benchmark Run: Thu Apr  6 21:23:23 EDT 2006
     21:23:23  up 9 days, 19:53,  1 user,  load average: 0.47, 0.55, 0.54
    
    End Benchmark Run: Thu Apr  6 21:35:10 EDT 2006
     21:35:10  up 9 days, 20:05,  1 user,  load average: 15.04, 6.95, 3.57
    
    
                         INDEX VALUES            
    TEST                                        BASELINE     RESULT      INDEX
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables        376783.7  1994794.0       52.9
    Double-Precision Whetstone                      83.1      488.0       58.7
    Execl Throughput                               188.3      710.8       37.7
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks         2672.0     5267.0       19.7
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           1077.0     1997.0       18.5
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        15382.0   103424.0       67.2
    Pipe Throughput                             111814.6   101824.9        9.1
    Pipe-based Context Switching                 15448.6    25732.7       16.7
    Process Creation                               569.3      810.7       14.2
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    44.8      128.8       28.8
    System Call Overhead                        114433.5    53594.5        4.7
                                                                     =========
         FINAL SCORE                                                      22.7
      0 Not allowed!

  12. #287
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    612
    JaguarPC
    10 GB Storage
    128MB RAM Guaranteed (Burstable)
    150 GB Premium Transfer
    Direct Admin

    Code:
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht)
    System -- Linux vps.24proxy.com 2.6.8-022stab070.4-enterprise #1 SMP Mon Mar 6 1
    MSK 2006 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
    /dev/vzfs             10485760    660184   9825576   7% /
    
    Start Benchmark Run: Thu Apr  6 21:48:54 CDT 2006
     21:48:54 up  1:33,  1 user,  load average: 0.67, 3.22, 2.19
    
    End Benchmark Run: Thu Apr  6 22:00:24 CDT 2006
     22:00:24 up  1:44,  1 user,  load average: 13.60, 6.23, 3.70
    
    
                         INDEX VALUES
    TEST                                        BASELINE     RESULT      INDEX
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables        376783.7  5044296.6      133.9
    Double-Precision Whetstone                      83.1     1323.8      159.3
    Execl Throughput                               188.3     1096.1       58.2
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks         2672.0    20664.0       77.3
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           1077.0     5703.0       53.0
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        15382.0   122991.0       80.0
    Pipe Throughput                             111814.6   170414.1       15.2
    Pipe-based Context Switching                 15448.6    59975.4       38.8
    Process Creation                               569.3     4318.8       75.9
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    44.8      289.6       64.6
    System Call Overhead                        114433.5   240800.9       21.0
                                                                     =========
         FINAL SCORE                                                      58.0
    Last edited by httpCORE; 04-06-2006 at 11:00 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

  13. #288
    Quote Originally Posted by Knownhost - J
    Since this thread primarily is focused around Xen and Virtuozzo I figured it would be good to post some news. Virtuozzo won the award at Linuxworld this week for product excellence in the "Virtualization category". Xen was in the competition along with Vmware and Virtual Iron. Have a nice day.

    -Jay

    That's awesome. There's small article about it here, which is the best I could find so far: http://www.thehostingnews.com/article2166.html
      0 Not allowed!

  14. #289

    XelHosting VPS (Plan #2 - 256 MB)

    XelHosting VPS - Plan #2 (256mb) - Fedora Core 5 - Xen 3.0

    ==============================================================
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht)
    System -- Linux fedora5-02.myxen.com 2.6.16-xenU #6 SMP Fri Apr 7 16:28:12 CDT 2006 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
    /dev/sda1 8323072 836716 7486356 11% /

    Start Benchmark Run: Sat Apr 8 01:39:17 EDT 2006
    01:39:17 up 5:58, 1 user, load average: 0.03, 0.01, 0.00

    End Benchmark Run: Sat Apr 8 01:49:52 EDT 2006
    01:49:52 up 6:08, 1 user, load average: 18.81, 7.16, 3.04


    INDEX VALUES
    TEST BASELINE RESULT INDEX

    Dhrystone 2 using register variables 376783.7 9045379.5 240.1
    Double-Precision Whetstone 83.1 1071.0 128.9
    Execl Throughput 188.3 2094.9 111.3
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 2672.0 147024.0 550.2
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1077.0 43078.0 400.0
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 15382.0 880463.0 572.4
    Pipe Throughput 111814.6 937531.5 83.8
    Pipe-based Context Switching 15448.6 150776.3 97.6
    Process Creation 569.3 3515.0 61.7
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 44.8 440.8 98.4
    System Call Overhead 114433.5 1199778.3 104.8
    =========
    FINAL SCORE 163.7


    I will say that this is 'right out the box' and am using this as a base-case to compare against when tuning the machine for true deployment.

    -Chris
      0 Not allowed!

  15. #290
    unixshell 256Mb - debian sarge

    Code:
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht)
    System -- Linux localhost 2.6.12.6-xenU #6 SMP Thu Mar 30 11:26:10 EST 2006 i686 GNU/Linux
    /dev/sda1             12337072    649812  11060572   6% /
    
    Start Benchmark Run: Tue Apr 11 12:45:02 EDT 2006
     12:45:02 up 17:05,  1 user,  load average: 0.02, 0.03, 0.00
    
    End Benchmark Run: Tue Apr 11 12:55:41 EDT 2006
     12:55:41 up 17:15,  1 user,  load average: 13.68, 6.15, 2.76
    
    
                         INDEX VALUES
    TEST                                        BASELINE     RESULT      INDEX
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables        376783.7  7973923.9      211.6
    Double-Precision Whetstone                      83.1     1101.2      132.5
    Execl Throughput                               188.3     2077.1      110.3
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks         2672.0    71030.0      265.8
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           1077.0    23244.0      215.8
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        15382.0   436021.0      283.5
    Pipe Throughput                             111814.6  1031892.0       92.3
    Pipe-based Context Switching                 15448.6   156735.6      101.5
    Process Creation                               569.3     3181.8       55.9
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    44.8      559.6      124.9
    System Call Overhead                        114433.5  1187817.3      103.8
                                                                     =========
         FINAL SCORE                                                     137.8
      0 Not allowed!

  16. #291
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,922
    jpetersen ,

    Yes, it is a great achievement and says a lot. I would like to hear why Virtuozzo was lucky on this one.. This shows how benchmarks are like knowing what someone runs the 40 yard dash in but they don't state the weather conditions. Of course on an indoor track you will run fast. If it is raining outside and you are running in your football cleats of course it will be slower. Same applies.

    -Jay
    KnownHost Managed VPS Specialists
    Toll Free: (866)-332-9894
    Fully Managed VPS, Wordpress, Cloud Servers, and Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  17. #292
    Quote Originally Posted by Knownhost - J
    jpetersen ,

    Yes, it is a great achievement and says a lot. I would like to hear why Virtuozzo was lucky on this one.. This shows how benchmarks are like knowing what someone runs the 40 yard dash in but they don't state the weather conditions. Of course on an indoor track you will run fast. If it is raining outside and you are running in your football cleats of course it will be slower. Same applies.

    -Jay
    I don't think benchmarks made much difference there. as long as performance is good, things like decent managment tools, both for providers and vps customers make a huge difference. and Virtuozzo has the undisputed edge there (to be honest i don't think there are any real "managment" tools for xen).
    So, even though i believe virtuozzo can't beat xen in the exact same conditions, i also believe it doesn't matter much for them because of this.
      0 Not allowed!

  18. #293
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    56

    Talking

    Freedom Plan $39.95 / mo at JAGUARPC:COM

    Code:
    ==============================================================
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht)
    System -- Linux ###################### 2.6.8-022stab067.1-enterprise #1 SMP Mon Jan 23 20:55:01 MSK 2006 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
    /dev/vzfs             20971520   2523105  18448415  13% /
    
    Start Benchmark Run: Mon Apr 17 23:49:07 COT 2006
     23:49:07 up 1 day, 23:03,  1 user,  load average: 0.10, 0.03, 0.01
    
    End Benchmark Run: Tue Apr 18 00:02:15 COT 2006
     00:02:15 up 1 day, 23:17,  1 user,  load average: 14.92, 6.44, 3.00
    
    
                         INDEX VALUES
    TEST                                                  BASELINE     RESULT      INDEX
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables        376783.7    10255452.8        272.2
    Double-Precision Whetstone                          83.1          1322.8        159.2
    Execl Throughput                                       188.3          2331.1        123.8
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        2672.0         22997.0          86.1
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1077.0          8950.0          83.1
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks      15382.0      331407.0         215.5
    Pipe Throughput                                    111814.6      378459.0           33.8
    Pipe-based Context Switching                     15448.6      107896.7           69.8
    Process Creation                                           569.3         6114.7         107.4
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                              44.8          526.7          117.6
    System Call Overhead                             114433.5      451675.5           39.5
                                                                                             =========
         FINAL SCORE                                                                             99.8
      0 Not allowed!

  19. #294

    powervps and vpsland benchmarks

    I'm currently testing out different vps hosts at the moment because I found powervps to be slow. I'm running an encrypted proxy server on my vps which has been tailored for low cpu usage but powervps doesnt seem to have the power I need. I tried out vpsland and it was great at first cpu and bandwidth wise but then the bandwidth went slow all of a sudden and is staying slow. They say they haven't changed anything but I have my doubts. Anyway as you can see powervps really lacks power compared to vpsland. I'm trying out unixshell next and will cancel both powervps and vpsland if all goes well.

    VPSLAND (XL256 package with 256mb ram):

    Code:
    ==============================================================
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht)
    System -- Linux	localhost.localdomain 2.6.12.6-vpsX #3 SMP Fri Mar 31 23:10:28 EST 2006	i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
    /dev/sda1	      10321208	 3075352   6721568  32%	/
    
    Start Benchmark	Run: Tue Apr 18	15:55:14 EDT 2006
     15:55:14 up 3 days, 10:59,  2 users,  load average: 0.06, 0.02, 0.00
    
    End Benchmark Run: Tue Apr 18 16:06:30 EDT 2006
     16:06:30 up 3 days, 11:10,  2 users,  load average: 15.04, 6.35, 2.87
    
    
    		     INDEX VALUES
    TEST					    BASELINE	 RESULT	     INDEX
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables	    376783.7  1674293.2	      44.4
    Double-Precision Whetstone			83.1	  767.0	      92.3
    Execl Throughput			       188.3	  878.3	      46.6
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks	      2672.0	60571.0	     226.7
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks	      1077.0	23318.0	     216.5
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks	     15382.0   410059.0	     266.6
    Pipe Throughput				    111814.6   322077.7	      28.8
    Pipe-based Context Switching		     15448.6	62625.6	      40.5
    Process	Creation			       569.3	 1555.7	      27.3
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)			44.8	  246.9	      55.1
    System Call Overhead			    114433.5   492819.8	      43.1
    								 =========
         FINAL SCORE						      69.7
    POWERVPS (webmin power-0 package with 128mb ram):

    Code:
    ==============================================================
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht)
    System -- Linux	host.neilking.com 2.4.20-021stab028.19.777-enterprise #1 SMP Wed Oct 19	13:05:01 MSD 2005 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
    /dev/vzfs	       5242880	 4912716    330164  94%	/
    
    Start Benchmark	Run: Tue Apr 18	15:55:06 EDT 2006
     15:55:06 up 32	days,  1:27,  2	users,	load average: 0.55, 0.21, 0.07
    
    End Benchmark Run: Tue Apr 18 16:16:45 EDT 2006
     16:16:46 up 32	days,  1:49,  2	users,	load average: 16.94, 7.90, 4.84
    
    
    		     INDEX VALUES
    TEST					    BASELINE	 RESULT	     INDEX
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables	    376783.7   598040.7	      15.9
    Double-Precision Whetstone			83.1	  949.5	     114.3
    Execl Throughput			       188.3	  131.4	       7.0
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks	      2672.0	 1619.0	       6.1
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks	      1077.0	  507.0	       4.7
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks	     15382.0	15180.0	       9.9
    Pipe Throughput				    111814.6	21314.1	       1.9
    Pipe-based Context Switching		     15448.6	 6213.6	       4.0
    Process	Creation			       569.3	  112.8	       2.0
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)			44.8	   17.0	       3.8
    System Call Overhead			    114433.5	36115.5	       3.2
    								 =========
         FINAL SCORE						       6.3
    Last edited by an0maly; 04-18-2006 at 11:45 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

  20. #295
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,922
    The Powervps score is low but I am sure it is on VZ 2.6 which is based on the RH 2.4 kernel. Not an excuse but now a days 100+ is easy on a VZ 3.0 server. Did you talk to them about it? Best of luck.

    -Jay
      0 Not allowed!

  21. #296
    Hmmm, maybe I'll talk to them and give them a chance to fix the situation as their support is top quality and it would be a shame to lose it.
      0 Not allowed!

  22. #297
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,922
    Yes, contact them.

    -Jay
    KnownHost Managed VPS Specialists
    Toll Free: (866)-332-9894
    Fully Managed VPS, Wordpress, Cloud Servers, and Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  23. #298
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    98
    Code:
    BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht)
    System -- Linux server1.hominghost.com 2.6.8-022stab070.1-entnosplit #1 SMP Mon Feb 20 18:26:08 MSK 2006 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
    /dev/vzfs              7340032    258280   7081752   4% /
    
    Start Benchmark Run: Tue Apr 18 23:50:25 EDT 2006
     23:50:25 up  3:20,  0 users,  load average: 0.08, 0.02, 0.01
    
    End Benchmark Run: Wed Apr 19 00:01:09 EDT 2006
     00:01:09 up  3:31,  0 users,  load average: 15.21, 6.31, 2.74
    
    
                         INDEX VALUES
    TEST                                        BASELINE     RESULT      INDEX
    
    Dhrystone 2 using register variables        376783.7  6063096.6      160.9
    Double-Precision Whetstone                      83.1     1151.6      138.6
    Execl Throughput                               188.3     2339.8      124.3
    File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks         2672.0    29588.0      110.7
    File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           1077.0    12731.0      118.2
    File Read 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        15382.0   385752.0      250.8
    Pipe Throughput                             111814.6   965803.4       86.4
    Pipe-based Context Switching                 15448.6   161116.8      104.3
    Process Creation                               569.3     5275.0       92.7
    Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    44.8      452.8      101.1
    System Call Overhead                        114433.5  1610397.6      140.7
                                                                     =========
         FINAL SCORE                                                     124.1
    That is on Knownhost's smallest VPS plan, I'm falling in love with this company!
    HostPing - Shared Hosting/Virtual Servers/Dedicated Servers
    Interested,
    Email Us Now
      0 Not allowed!

  24. #299
    Gotta love the support response times with powervps. Unfortunately the answer they gave was not what I was looking for:

    "Unix bench is for dedicated servers and is not recommended in VPSes. When
    you run unixbench on a VPS, you are just hogging the cpu and thus affecting all
    the VPSes hosted in the node. If you see any delay with your sites, then, let us
    know the URL concerned and we will help you in everyway possible to get it
    rectified. Regarding the Virtuozzo version - Your node has Virtuozzo version
    2.6.2."

    What do you guys think?
      0 Not allowed!

  25. #300
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,922
    That is a true comment.

    -Jay
    KnownHost Managed VPS Specialists
    Toll Free: (866)-332-9894
    Fully Managed VPS, Wordpress, Cloud Servers, and Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

Page 12 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2910111213141522 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •