Results 1 to 9 of 9
Thread: Initial Review of Misterhost.de
-
02-09-2012, 11:42 PM #1Newbie
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 6
Initial Review of Misterhost.de
This is an initial review of MisterHost.de. MisterHost is a German budget seller, offering reasonable plans at reasonable prices with large amounts of bandwidth. I am on a XEN 1024M Intel i7 950 Node. This host is a great provider for a VPN, Proxy, etc. It is, however, not good for I/O tasks (such as high traffic sites). I am pleased with the host.
Connection Speed:10/10
Ping:9/10
Support:7/10 (Takes a couple hours, but is helpful and knowledgeable)
I/O:3/10 (PAINFULLY slow I/O speeds)
Price:9/10
Ping from a KiloServe VPS (Los Angeles, California, USA)
Code:root@server1:~# ping -c 5 <REDACTED> PING <REDACTED> (<REDACTED>) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=1 ttl=45 time=171 ms 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=2 ttl=45 time=169 ms 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=3 ttl=45 time=169 ms 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=4 ttl=45 time=169 ms 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=5 ttl=45 time=169 ms --- <REDACTED> ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4631ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 169.282/170.149/171.827/0.984 ms
Ping from RamHost VPS (Kansas City, Missouri, USA)
Code:root@server2:~# ping -c 5 <REDACTED> PING <REDACTED> (<REDACTED>) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=1 ttl=52 time=110 ms 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=2 ttl=52 time=111 ms 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=3 ttl=52 time=110 ms 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=4 ttl=52 time=110 ms 64 bytes from <REDACTED>: icmp_req=5 ttl=52 time=111 ms --- <REDACTED> ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4019ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 110.699/110.906/111.079/0.444 ms
I/O Speed Tests:
Code:root@server3:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm -rf test 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 170.038 s, 6.3 MB/s
Code:root@server3:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm -rf test 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 93.5141 s, 11.5 MB/s
CacheFly SpeedTest (04:00(am) Local Time)
Code:root@server3:~# wget -O /dev/null hxxp://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test && rm -rf 100mb.test --2012-02-09 21:08:38-- hxxp://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: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 57.2M/s in 1.7s 2012-02-09 21:08:40 (57.2 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
Code:root@server3:~# wget -O /dev/null hxxp://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test && rm -rf 100mb.test --2012-02-09 21:30:17-- hxxp://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: `/dev/null' 100%[======================================>] 104,857,600 53.6M/s in 1.9s 2012-02-09 21:30:19 (53.6 MB/s) - `/dev/null' saved [104857600/104857600]
-
02-09-2012, 11:55 PM #2(formerly WhichGunDotCom)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
- Location
- Woodbridge, NJ
- Posts
- 840
How long have you been with this host?
Also be sure to verify your review with WHT staff.
-
02-10-2012, 12:14 AM #3Newbie
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 6
-
02-10-2012, 03:45 AM #4Newbie
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- Posts
- 26
I'd definitely raise a ticket about the I/O…
2 x OpenVZ
128MB
Code:dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm test 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 10.7161 s, 100 MB/s dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm test 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 10.9885 s, 97.7 MB/s dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm test 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 10.1849 s, 105 MB/s
Code:dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm test 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 12.7167 s, 84.4 MB/s dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm test 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 11.8867 s, 90.3 MB/s dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm test 16384+0 records in 16384+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 12.7981 s, 83.9 MB/s
-
02-10-2012, 08:03 PM #5Newbie
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 6
Problems were solved. Speeds are the same, but support is 10/10, and I/O is 8.5/10 (~100-110MB/s)
-
02-11-2012, 12:11 AM #6Newbie
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Posts
- 12
what is the best method to test I/O? I would like to do this on my vps too
-
02-11-2012, 12:16 AM #7Newbie
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 6
Code:dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync && rm test
-
02-11-2012, 10:56 AM #8Newbie
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Posts
- 12
Is this a good value: 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 8.6083 seconds, 125 MB/s
sorry for offtopic
-
02-11-2012, 11:17 AM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Posts
- 669
Yes, 125 MB/s is very good value (above average I would say) but don't hammer node too much with regular "dd" tests, please
Similar Threads
-
Initial StormonDemand review :(
By ishan in forum Cloud HostingReplies: 8Last Post: 12-01-2010, 02:37 PM -
Dynaceron: Initial Review
By tonemapped in forum Dedicated ServerReplies: 6Last Post: 06-11-2010, 10:00 PM -
Photonvps Initial Review
By imatechie in forum VPS HostingReplies: 9Last Post: 05-13-2010, 09:38 AM -
Initial review: surfspeedy.com
By anneho in forum Web HostingReplies: 20Last Post: 09-06-2004, 12:03 AM -
$5 a month hosting at MisterHost.net
By Eli in forum Shared Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 07-28-2003, 11:11 PM