CommPulse

This is the only thread where you should post news about becoming certified. For everyone else, join us in celebrating the recent certifications!!! submitted by /u/AutoModerator [link] [comments]

I have 2 vps there , they had a Urgent Hypervisor Restart , but one of my vps its offline 3 days now , @Chunkserve it's not responding in the tickets also i wrote him here again no answer , is there anyone else having the same issue ?

The Microsoft cloud changes very quickly. New Azure services, security updates, AI features, architecture guidance, and Microsoft 365 improvements are released almost every day. I have always found it difficult to keep up with everything that is happening. Following multiple blogs, documentation sites, and news sources takes a lot of time. That is why I created, and also vibe coded 🏄🏼, the Cloud Dashboard. It is a single place where I, and anyone else working with Microsoft technologies, can easily see the latest Microsoft updates. Instead of checking many different websites, you can find the most important Microsoft cloud news in one place. The idea came to me while thinking about the summer holidays. Even though we all need time away from work, I still like to know what is happening in the Microsoft world. Whether you are relaxing on the beach, sitting by the pool, or simply enjoying your holiday, it is nice to have an easy way to stay up to date without spending hours searching for information. I thought some of you might find it useful as well, so I wanted to share it here. Blog submitted by /u/brianveldman [link] [comments]

Hi everyone, I'm a 2025 Computer Science graduate from India. I'm struggling to get an IT support or infrastructure support job mainly because my spoken English isn't very strong, even though I can troubleshoot issues practically. I'm considering joining a BPO (technical support/chat support) for financial stability while continuing to learn Linux, Git, Docker, AWS, Kubernetes, and DevOps after work. Has anyone here transitioned from BPO or technical support into DevOps or cloud roles? How difficult was it, and what roadmap or advice would you recommend? I'd really appreciate hearing your experiences. submitted by /u/Melodic_Struggle_95 [link] [comments]

While everyone celebrates when things work, few see the effort it takes to keep them that way. Tomorrow, we celebrate the people who make it happen. Happy SysAdmin Day to all the wonderful SysAdmins out there! submitted by /u/WrencyLily [link] [comments]

We have several HPE ProLiant DL360 Gen9 servers available for sale. Specifications: Model: HPE ProLiant DL360 Gen9 CPU: 2 × Intel Xeon E5-2697A v4 Network: HPE Ethernet 10Gb 2-port 560FLR-SFP+ adapter Rails: Included Memory: Not included Storage: Not included Price: $150 USD per server Location: The servers are currently located at Hurricane Electric Fremont 2 (FMT2) in Fremont, California. Local pickup is strongly preferred. Pickup must be arranged in advance. Bonus: We also have one Cisco Catalyst 4948E switch available. It will be included free of charge with the first completed server purchase. The switch is limited to one unit and will go to the first buyer who completes payment and pickup, not simply the first person to comment. Please comment in the thread or send me a PM if interested.

VeloxServ is a privately owned UK colocation provider with over 18 years of proven operational experience. We offer secure, resilient data centre space just outside Birmingham, UK - delivering enterprise-grade infrastructure at significantly lower cost than London Docklands. 📍 Locations: Wolverhampton & Redditch 🏢 Facilities: 3 purpose-built, high-spec UK data centres ⚡ Immediate occupation available Why Choose VeloxServ? ISO 9001 & 27001 Accredited Fully redundant N+N UPS & N+N Diesel Generators (auto changeover) 100Gbps+ resilient network with multiple fibre wavelengths to London Docklands & Manchester N+1 CRAC cooling 24/7/365 on-site support & remote hands Secure access to all technical areas VESDA & FM200 fire suppression HD CCTV with 24/7 recording Free parking, Wi-Fi & refreshments for visiting engineers What’s Included with Every Rack Lockable cabinet Dual A+B power feeds APC PDUs 10Gbps network uplink 100TB monthly bandwidth (CDR billing available) /28 IPv4 subnet (13 usable IPs, more available with justification) Remote hands available 24/7/365 data centre access 18-month contract £0 setup fee UK Colocation Packages (Fully Customisable) Single Server Colocation 1U-4U 0.5A to 4A power options from £45 / month Lockable Quarter Rack 2A power (scalable up to 8A) £175 / month Lockable Half Rack 4A power (scalable up to 16A) £325 / month Lockable Full Rack 8A power (scalable up to 64A) £575 / month Lockable Full Rack 16A power (scalable up to 64A) £875 / month Need Something Bespoke? We specialise in custom colocation solutions, higher power densities delivered via 3phase racks, private networking, and tailored bandwidth. 👉 Contact us today to reserve space or design a custom solution.

Not going to lie. It's been a bad day. I almost tell them "take this job and shove it' after reviewing all these crappy AI codes. Vibe coding is not only a joke. It's a monster that mocks our hard-earned experiences! I am thinking of leaving the industry! If you could go back ten years from now and know what you're knowing right now, would you still do DevOps? submitted by /u/Inner-Chemistry8971 [link] [comments]

I've recently replaced the cat6 infrastructure around the site I look after and introduced a 10Gb fibre ring between all switches for resilience and performance. However... it's highlighted that our WiFi infrastructure is woefully inadequate. It's Unifi, which I don't necessarily have a problem with for a business our size - 2 floor factory with 130 employees - but before I buy a load more access points to patch all the poor signal areas, is there a more suitable solution I should be considering? I don't have a budget in mind but I'd like to avoid the very expensive enterprise level solutions if possible. Whatever I use has to be available in the UK. submitted by /u/Obvious-Water569 [link] [comments]

So I'll preface by saying I'm not a sysadmin. I work primarily with IoT and automation. Recently, due to hard drives failing. Several of our VMs got wiped. And the ones that were salvaged were backups from months ago so all work done in the past month or so. That includes several docker containers, databases, scripts and SCADA projects. All gone. Basically a huge chunk of our infrastructure is on fire right now. Due to this, I randomly decided to inspect the VM mac addresses for once. And to my horror. It turns out they're using Vmware workstation. Now I may not be a sysadmin, but I do have a Proxmox server at home running opnsense. And my main machine is arch Linux. So I have some basic VM experience. Isn't it typical to assume that production servers run on Esxi, KVM/QEMU or HyperV. Or is this a far more common occurrence than what I'm assuming as an outsider to the professional sysadmin world. I would like to believe that hardware failures aside the general instability of these VMs have to do with running a type 2 hypervisor rather than a type 1. Is using workstation and even virtual box (ew) something that commonly happens in more legacy infrastructure? submitted by /u/The_Galatiatex [link] [comments]

Looking for a dedicated server with the following specs: Number of Cores: Min. 16 cores or Dual CPU RAM: Min. 64GB Disk Space: 1TB NVMe (OS) + 4TB NVMe (Data) Bandwidth: Min. 330TB/month included Port Speed: 10Gbps DDoS Protection: Not required Location: EU Budget: ~150€, Crypto (USDT/XMR etc.) preferred Billing period: Monthly Thank you very much!

Hello LET, We're offering Intel Xeon E5 V3/V4 dedicated servers hosted in our Tier IV-certified Mumbai data center. These servers are well-suited for web hosting, virtualization, enterprise applications, databases, development environments, and other business workloads. Deal #1 : Processor Type : Intel Xeon E5 V3/V4 Supported Processors : • 1 X Intel Xeon E5-2680 v4 14 Core 2.8 Ghz • 1 X Intel Xeon E5-2667 V4 8 Cores 3.2 Ghz • 2 X Intel Xeon E5-2680 v4 28 Core 2.8 Ghz • 2 X Intel Xeon E5-2667 V4 16 Cores 3.2 Ghz RAM : Starting from 32 GB to 384 GB Disk size : Starting from 480 GB SSD to 3.84 TB NVMe Pricing : Starting from 183$ Order Here 👉 for USD Order Here 👉 for INR Why Choose Leapswitch? Enterprise-grade Intel Xeon E5 V3/V4 dedicated servers DDR5 ECC memory for enhanced reliability and performance Enterprise U.3 NVMe SSD storage Flexible hardware customization (RAM, storage, bandwidth, and storage upgrades) Tier IV-certified data center infrastructure Same-day provisioning (subject to stock availability) 20+ years of trust. Already served 22000+ customers. Team of 120+ engineers with 24/7 customer support Custom Configuration Available Need more RAM, additional NVMe storage, higher bandwidth, or a custom server configuration? We can tailor a dedicated server to meet your infrastructure requirements. Contact Us Sales : [email protected] Phone : +91 9599656657 If you have any questions about these configurations or need a custom quote, feel free to reply to this thread or contact our sales team.

I need a VPS in Singapore with a 1c1g configuration, approximately 500GB of bandwidth out is also acceptable. Thank you. My budget is around $10-$17/year.

Hello everyone, I am interested in going for Google Professional Cloud Architect exam not sure how to start my journey. Any suggestions? I have 12 years of experience in Cisco routing and switching, DC and observability. Thanks submitted by /u/insomniac_phantom [link] [comments]

🇺🇸 🇫🇷 🇨🇦 KVM VPS from $48/year | SSD RAID10 | IPv4 + IPv6 | Since 2016 Hello LET, HostNamaste has been providing affordable and reliable VPS hosting since 2016. Today we're offering our yearly KVM VPS plans in the USA, France, and Canada with SSD RAID10 storage, full virtualization, IPv4 + IPv6 connectivity, and 24/7 support. Why Choose HostNamaste? ✔ Established Since 2016 ✔ KVM Virtualization ✔ Full Root Access ✔ SSD RAID10 Storage ✔ IPv4 + IPv6 Included ✔ SolusVM / Virtualizor - VPS Control Panel Access ✔ Instant Setup ✔ Custom ISO Support ✔ 24/7/365 Support ✔ Multiple Global Locations 🚀 YEARLY KVM VPS DEALS $48/year – 2GB KVM VPS ● 2 GB RAM ● 50 GB SSD RAID10 Storage ● 2 TB Premium Bandwidth ● 2 vCPU Cores ● 1 x IPv4 Address ● 1 x IPv6 Address ● KVM Virtualization ● VPS Control Panel Access ● USA, France & Canada ORDER NOW $60/year – 3GB KVM VPS ● 3 GB RAM ● 80 GB SSD RAID10 Storage ● 3 TB Premium Bandwidth ● 2 vCPU Cores ● 1 x IPv4 Address ● 1 x IPv6 Address ● KVM Virtualization ● VPS Control Panel Access ● USA, France & Canada ORDER NOW $72/year – 4GB KVM VPS ● 4 GB RAM ● 120 GB SSD RAID10 Storage ● 4 TB Premium Bandwidth ● 2 vCPU Cores ● 1 x IPv4 Address ● 1 x IPv6 Address ● KVM Virtualization ● VPS Control Panel Access ● USA, France & Canada ORDER NOW 🌎 Available Locations 🇺🇸 Los Angeles, California, USA 🇺🇸 Dallas, Texas, USA 🇫🇷 Paris, France 🇨🇦 Toronto, Canada 🖥 Infrastructure ● Dual Intel Xeon E5 Series ● 256 GB RAM ● SSD RAID10 Storage ● 1 Gbps Network Uplink 🐧 Operating Systems & Templates Choose from a wide range of operating systems and templates including: ● AlmaLinux ● Rocky Linux ● Ubuntu ● Debian ● Fedora ● CentOS ● Oracle Linux ● OpenSUSE ● Windows Server Templates ● Custom ISO Installation Support View the complete list: https://www.hostnamaste.com/blog/operating-systems-templates-we-support/ 💳 Payment Methods We support customers worldwide through multiple payment methods including: ● PayPal ● Credit Cards ● Debit Cards ● Cryptocurrency ● UPI ● Alipay ● Payoneer ● Net Banking ● Digital Wallets ● Regional Payment Methods Full payment methods list: https://www.hostnamaste.com/blog/payments-we-accept-hostnamaste/ 📡 Network Information Los Angeles: https://www.hostnamaste.com/datacenter-losangeles.php Dallas: https://www.hostnamaste.com/datacenter-dallas.php France: https://www.hostnamaste.com/datacenter-france.php Canada: https://www.hostnamaste.com/datacenter-canada.php 📜 Terms Terms of Service: https://www.hostnamaste.com/tos.php Acceptable Usage Policy: https://www.hostnamaste.com/aup.php If you have any questions, need a custom VPS configuration, or require additional resources, please feel free to reply below or submit a support ticket. Thank you for considering HostNamaste!

Hi, everyone. I was thinking about my VPS just now and thought I'd write a short review about it and my provider. I signed up for @Terabix in November 2024 and went for their CVM-2GB plan. I played with it for a month and was completely happy with it. The server was snappy; nothing bad to report at all. However, I cancelled it soon after because I got their 2024 BF offer (BF-1GB plan), which is more efficient for my usage (just a Caddy reverse proxy and some internal VPN stuff, with CrowdSec (GeoIP disabled) for protection). And it has performed admirably ever since. I am also just as happy with their customer support as I am with their server performance. They are courteous, friendly and helpful. Shout out to Justin! 🫡 For the record, I have only ever opened three support tickets: the first was to request one additional /64 IPv6 block, the second was to request a manual deletion of an IPv6 address in the control panel, and the last was to migrate said IP block from the old VM to the new VM. As a Malaysian, I am delighted to see a local company providing a great service at competitive value (great value in my case!), especially one that made me stop VPS hunting. I hope the company grows and thrives. Have a nice day, everyone. 😃 Obligatory YABS benchmark result: # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## # # Yet-Another-Bench-Script # # v2026-07-24 # # https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script # # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## # Thu Jul 30 12:27:58 +08 2026 Basic System Information: --------------------------------- Uptime : 2 days, 22 hours, 0 minutes Processor : AMD EPYC 9654 96-Core Processor CPU cores : 1 @ 2396.400 MHz AES-NI : ✔ Enabled VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled RAM : 927.1 MiB Swap : 1.9 GiB Disk : 9.8 GiB Distro : Debian GNU/Linux 13 (trixie) Kernel : 6.12.96+deb13-amd64 VM Type : KVM IPv4/IPv6 : ✔ Online / ✔ Online IPv6 Network Information: --------------------------------- ISP : Terabix ASN : AS137552 Terabix Host : Terabix Technologies Sdn. Bhd Location : Johor Bahru, Johor (01) Country : Malaysia fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/vda1): --------------------------------- Block Size | 4k (IOPS) | 64k (IOPS) ------ | --- ---- | ---- ---- Read | 194.59 MB/s (47.5k) | 2.49 GB/s (38.0k) Write | 195.11 MB/s (47.6k) | 2.50 GB/s (38.2k) Total | 389.70 MB/s (95.1k) | 4.99 GB/s (76.2k) | | Block Size | 512k (IOPS) | 1m (IOPS) ------ | --- ---- | ---- ---- Read | 5.28 GB/s (10.0k) | 5.80 GB/s (5.5k) Write | 5.56 GB/s (10.6k) | 6.19 GB/s (5.9k) Total | 10.84 GB/s (20.6k) | 11.99 GB/s (11.4k) iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv4): --------------------------------- Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed | Ping ----- | ----- | ---- | ---- | ---- Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 673 Mbits/sec | 394 Mbits/sec | 164 ms Eranium | Amsterdam, NL (100G) | 969 Mbits/sec | 657 Mbits/sec | 161 ms Uztelecom | Tashkent, UZ (10G) | 919 Mbits/sec | 296 Mbits/sec | 181 ms Leaseweb | Singapore, SG (10G) | 1.10 Gbits/sec | 935 Mbits/sec | 1.93 ms Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 857 Mbits/sec | 420 Mbits/sec | 175 ms Leaseweb | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 752 Mbits/sec | 683 Mbits/sec | 227 ms Edgoo | Sao Paulo, BR (1G) | busy | 198 Mbits/sec | 330 ms iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv6): --------------------------------- Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed | Ping ----- | ----- | ---- | ---- | ---- Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 941 Mbits/sec | 487 Mbits/sec | 167 ms Eranium | Amsterdam, NL (100G) | 966 Mbits/sec | 684 Mbits/sec | 156 ms Uztelecom | Tashkent, UZ (10G) | busy | busy | 181 ms Leaseweb | Singapore, SG (10G) | 1.09 Gbits/sec | 928 Mbits/sec | -- Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 891 Mbits/sec | 466 Mbits/sec | 182 ms Leaseweb | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 735 Mbits/sec | 479 Mbits/sec | 226 ms Edgoo | Sao Paulo, BR (1G) | busy | 216 Mbits/sec | 342 ms Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test: --------------------------------- Test | Value | Single Core | Multi Core | Full Test | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/18865830 YABS completed in 25 min 51 sec My plan info page:

Hello all, To preface this: the matter this relates to has already been reported through the appropriate channels, including AWS' compliance process and relevant authorities. The reason I am asking here is that I have struggled to clearly explain the technical side of the infrastructure and what information would actually be available to AWS. The context is that I encountered a Tor hidden service that appeared to be using Amazon CloudFront, presumably for CDN functionality (and possibly WAF-related features, although I am not certain). From what I could tell, it appeared to primarily be acting as a CDN rather than anything else. The question I have been trying to answer for quite some time is: what visibility would Amazon/CloudFront have into the service behind it? I am familiar with Cloudflare's approach to Tor-related services, but I am less familiar with how Amazon CloudFront handles this type of setup. My assumption is that if CloudFront was genuinely being used, the distribution would have some configured origin/backend relationship — but I am unclear what that means from AWS' perspective. Specifically: Would AWS know the origin server/backend configured behind the CloudFront distribution? Would the use of Tor change anything about what CloudFront can see on the server/CDN side? Are there cases where CloudFront could be involved without AWS having visibility into the actual hosting infrastructure? I am mainly trying to understand the technical architecture and put some uncertainty to rest. submitted by /u/DrDeath47 [link] [comments]

I got my hands on one of @HostDZire 's own (own HW) VPS in NL, AMS and of course benchmarked it. Here are the results (based on > 30 runs). As usual first sysinfo processor and memory. Version 2.5.0a, (c) 2018+ jsg (->lowendtalk.com) Machine: amd64, Arch.: amd64, Model: AMD EPYC 7K62 48-Core Processor OS, version: FreeBSD 14.2, Mem.: 5.989 GB CPU - Cores: 4, Family/Model/Stepping: 23/49/0 Cache: 32K/32K L1d/L1i, 512K L2, 192M L3 Std. Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 cflsh mmx fxsr sse sse2 htt sse3 pclmulqdq ssse3 fma cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt aes xsave osxsave avx f16c rdrnd hypervisor Ext. Flags: syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm lahf_lm cmp_legacy extapic cr8_legacy lzcnt sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw AES? Yes Nested Virt.? No HW RNG? Yes ProcMem SC [MB/s]: avg 229.4 - min 92.8 (40.5 %), max 366.0 (159.6 %) ProcMem MA [MB/s]: avg 990.3 - min 879.4 (88.8 %), max 1110.0 (112.1 %) ProcMem MB [MB/s]: avg 1065.2 - min 968.5 (90.9 %), max 1190.0 (111.7 %) ProcMem AES [MB/s]: avg 1151.5 - min 1144.2 (99.4 %), max 1157.4 (100.5 %) ProcMem RSA [kp/s]: avg 101.1 - min 92.8 (91.8 %), max 107.8 (106.6 %) Nice and normal results for an Epyc. Crypto results also nice. All desirable flags are there. The only point of potential lack of happiness: no embedded virtualization, which I normally do not care about at all but with 4 vCores it might not be nonsensical to embed one or more smaller VPSs within a relatively beefy VPS. Now, let's look at the disk. --- Disk 4 KB - Buffered --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 11.17 - min 8.50 (76.1%), max 12.69 (113.7%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 10.91 - min 8.56 (78.5%), max 13.26 (121.5%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 26.10 - min 18.67 (71.5%), max 34.72 (133.0%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 20.29 - min 14.51 (71.5%), max 30.75 (151.5%) --- Disk 4 KB - Sync/Direct --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 10.90 - min 9.25 (84.8%), max 13.38 (122.7%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 10.85 - min 9.50 (87.5%), max 13.41 (123.5%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 26.36 - min 18.86 (71.6%), max 34.47 (130.8%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 23.62 - min 17.10 (72.4%), max 29.68 (125.6%) --- Disk 64 KB - Buffered --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 105.68 - min 89.90 (85.1%), max 123.18 (116.6%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 118.37 - min 99.80 (84.3%), max 139.77 (118.1%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 2707.48 - min 2193.75 (81.0%), max 3538.00 (130.7%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 326.68 - min 216.00 (66.1%), max 424.00 (129.8%) --- Disk 64 KB - Sync/Direct --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 11.99 - min 9.72 (81.1%), max 13.14 (109.6%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 6.41 - min 5.41 (84.4%), max 6.88 (107.3%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 2398.59 - min 1752.44 (73.1%), max 2857.05 (119.1%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 304.45 - min 230.67 (75.8%), max 380.80 (125.1%) --- Disk 1 MB - Buffered --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 172.89 - min 149.98 (86.7%), max 189.32 (109.5%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 354.21 - min 300.21 (84.8%), max 397.65 (112.3%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 4418.78 - min 3775.67 (85.4%), max 5013.70 (113.5%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 1622.05 - min 1390.84 (85.7%), max 1891.14 (116.6%) --- Disk 1 MB - Sync/Direct --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 41.49 - min 35.17 (84.8%), max 43.94 (105.9%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 26.81 - min 22.54 (84.1%), max 28.09 (104.8%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 3701.02 - min 3179.04 (85.9%), max 4109.73 (111.0%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 1696.15 - min 1420.89 (83.8%), max 1987.98 (117.2%) --- Disk IOps (Sync/Direct) --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 36.55 - min 34.62 (94.7%), max 37.90 (103.7%) IOps : avg 9357.70 - min 8861.50 (94.7%), max 9701.23 (103.7%) Wow, that's a quite nice NVMe with close to 10000 IOps! (Side note: while I do not know how many nodes with RAID'ed disk @HostDZire already have there, I know that this VPS has such a disk and there seem to be plans to upgrade all nodes) Finally connectivity, which I expect to be quite decent as the Leaseweb network is used. --- Europe --- NO OSL mirror.terrahost.no [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 479.3 - min 90.6 (18.9%), max 609.3 (127.1%) Ping [ms]: avg 20.0 - min 17.3 (86.5%), max 21.1 (105.5%) Web ping [ms]: avg 61.3 - min 17.5 (28.5%), max 128.0 (208.7%) UK LON lon.speedtest.clouvider.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 1058.8 - min 166.5 (15.7%), max 1471.7 (139.0%) Ping [ms]: avg 8.8 - min 8.6 (97.2%), max 10.3 (116.5%) Web ping [ms]: avg 8.9 - min 8.6 (96.6%), max 10.3 (115.7%) NL AMS nl.mirrors.clouvider.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 2455.6 - min 1500.9 (61.1%), max 3202.3 (130.4%) Ping [ms]: avg 1.0 - min 0.9 (90.9%), max 1.3 (131.4%) Web ping [ms]: avg 1.3 - min 0.9 (69.2%), max 2.1 (161.5%) DE FRA mirror.plusline.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 1190.4 - min 369.8 (31.1%), max 1395.9 (117.3%) Ping [ms]: avg 6.7 - min 6.6 (99.1%), max 7.3 (109.6%) Web ping [ms]: avg 7.8 - min 6.8 (86.9%), max 22.7 (289.9%) FR PAR ftp1.fr.freebsd.org [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 554.5 - min 98.0 (17.7%), max 629.1 (113.5%) Ping [ms]: avg 11.7 - min 11.4 (97.8%), max 14.6 (125.3%) Web ping [ms]: avg 33.2 - min 11.4 (34.4%), max 123.2 (371.5%) CH ZUR mirror.init7.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 736.9 - min 147.3 (20.0%), max 852.4 (115.7%) Ping [ms]: avg 12.5 - min 12.4 (99.1%), max 12.7 (101.5%) Web ping [ms]: avg 14.8 - min 12.6 (85.4%), max 17.7 (120.0%) ES MAD mirror.raiolanetworks.com [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 425.9 - min 365.0 (85.7%), max 447.7 (105.1%) Ping [ms]: avg 25.9 - min 24.7 (95.5%), max 30.7 (118.7%) Web ping [ms]: avg 27.9 - min 24.9 (89.3%), max 35.1 (125.8%) RO BUC mirrors.hosterion.ro [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 298.0 - min 287.8 (96.6%), max 306.8 (103.0%) Ping [ms]: avg 34.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 36.5 (104.5%) Web ping [ms]: avg 35.2 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 38.0 (108.1%) RU MOS speedtest.hostkey.ru [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 253.3 - min 39.7 (15.7%), max 290.1 (114.5%) Ping [ms]: avg 40.6 - min 40.4 (99.6%), max 40.9 (100.8%) Web ping [ms]: avg 61.5 - min 42.9 (69.8%), max 303.1 (493.0%) --- Asia / Oceania --- RU SIB mirror.truenetwork.ru [F: 2] DL [Mb/s]: avg 117.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 132.7 (113.4%) Ping [ms]: avg 81.3 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 83.6 (102.8%) Web ping [ms]: avg 94.4 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 168.0 (177.9%) IN MUM mirrors.piconets.webwerks.in [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 44.9 - min 29.4 (65.6%), max 48.0 (106.8%) Ping [ms]: avg 253.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 268.8 (105.9%) Web ping [ms]: avg 257.4 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 283.3 (110.0%) SG SGP mirror.sg.gs [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 69.3 - min 61.2 (88.3%), max 71.5 (103.1%) Ping [ms]: avg 161.1 - min 159.1 (98.8%), max 163.5 (101.5%) Web ping [ms]: avg 164.5 - min 160.1 (97.3%), max 168.0 (102.1%) CN HKG mirrors.xtom.hk [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 56.9 - min 43.6 (76.6%), max 62.0 (108.9%) Ping [ms]: avg 184.9 - min 184.7 (99.9%), max 185.0 (100.1%) Web ping [ms]: avg 193.3 - min 184.8 (95.6%), max 297.9 (154.1%) CN BEJ mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 54.5 - min 35.1 (64.4%), max 66.5 (122.0%) Ping [ms]: avg 232.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 250.5 (108.0%) Web ping [ms]: avg 232.2 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 250.5 (107.9%) JP OSA mirrors.xtom.jp [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 43.9 - min 39.0 (88.7%), max 45.2 (103.1%) Ping [ms]: avg 250.8 - min 250.6 (99.9%), max 251.3 (100.2%) Web ping [ms]: avg 251.2 - min 250.6 (99.8%), max 254.1 (101.2%) AU SYD mirror.internet.asn.au [F: 1] DL [Mb/s]: avg 44.3 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 46.8 (105.6%) Ping [ms]: avg 251.9 - min 250.9 (99.6%), max 266.3 (105.7%) Web ping [ms]: avg 252.0 - min 251.0 (99.6%), max 266.3 (105.7%) --- Africa --- KE NAI mirror.liquidtelecom.com [F: 11] DL [Mb/s]: avg 27.0 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 61.4 (227.3%) Ping [ms]: avg 138.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 210.6 (151.6%) Web ping [ms]: avg 158.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 1015.3 (638.8%) ZA WEC archlinux.za.mirror.allworldit.com [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 63.1 - min 25.7 (40.7%), max 71.9 (113.9%) Ping [ms]: avg 156.7 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 185.2 (118.2%) Web ping [ms]: avg 179.6 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 215.8 (120.1%) --- Americas --- CA MTL speedtest.mtl2.ca.leaseweb.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 125.3 - min 25.3 (20.2%), max 139.4 (111.3%) Ping [ms]: avg 82.2 - min 81.2 (98.8%), max 93.9 (114.3%) Web ping [ms]: avg 82.5 - min 81.4 (98.6%), max 93.9 (113.8%) US NYC nyc.mirrors.clouvider.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 132.6 - min 42.8 (32.3%), max 141.5 (106.7%) Ping [ms]: avg 77.5 - min 77.0 (99.4%), max 81.5 (105.2%) Web ping [ms]: avg 77.8 - min 77.2 (99.2%), max 81.7 (105.0%) US ASH ash.speedtest.clouvider.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 115.2 - min 105.9 (92.0%), max 128.4 (111.5%) Ping [ms]: avg 97.9 - min 97.7 (99.8%), max 98.7 (100.8%) Web ping [ms]: avg 98.0 - min 97.7 (99.7%), max 98.7 (100.7%) US PIB mirror.pit.teraswitch.com [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 113.5 - min 32.4 (28.6%), max 121.5 (107.1%) Ping [ms]: avg 92.3 - min 92.1 (99.8%), max 92.8 (100.5%) Web ping [ms]: avg 93.8 - min 92.2 (98.3%), max 97.3 (103.7%) US MIA speedtest.mia11.us.leaseweb.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 95.3 - min 33.1 (34.7%), max 108.9 (114.3%) Ping [ms]: avg 105.1 - min 104.8 (99.7%), max 106.3 (101.1%) Web ping [ms]: avg 105.6 - min 104.9 (99.3%), max 107.2 (101.5%) US CHI ord.mirror.rackspace.com [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 121.4 - min 113.8 (93.7%), max 124.5 (102.5%) Ping [ms]: avg 93.5 - min 93.3 (99.8%), max 93.7 (100.2%) Web ping [ms]: avg 128.4 - min 93.6 (72.9%), max 176.8 (137.7%) US ATL atl.speedtest.clouvider.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 106.2 - min 36.0 (33.9%), max 119.3 (112.4%) Ping [ms]: avg 102.7 - min 101.0 (98.3%), max 104.3 (101.6%) Web ping [ms]: avg 103.5 - min 101.0 (97.6%), max 117.7 (113.8%) US PHO phx.speedtest.clouvider.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 77.3 - min 20.9 (27.1%), max 85.5 (110.5%) Ping [ms]: avg 130.2 - min 128.8 (98.9%), max 132.4 (101.7%) Web ping [ms]: avg 131.5 - min 129.1 (98.2%), max 136.4 (103.7%) US PTL mirrors.cat.pdx.edu [F: 3] DL [Mb/s]: avg 66.9 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 77.3 (115.5%) Ping [ms]: avg 151.9 - min 148.7 (97.9%), max 153.2 (100.9%) Web ping [ms]: avg 154.0 - min 149.0 (96.8%), max 160.8 (104.4%) US LAX speedtest.lax12.us.leaseweb.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 82.0 - min 26.3 (32.1%), max 87.0 (106.2%) Ping [ms]: avg 131.8 - min 130.8 (99.3%), max 134.0 (101.7%) Web ping [ms]: avg 132.8 - min 131.2 (98.8%), max 138.8 (104.5%) US SJO mirrors.xtom.us [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 78.7 - min 63.5 (80.6%), max 82.4 (104.7%) Ping [ms]: avg 140.3 - min 140.2 (99.9%), max 140.8 (100.3%) Web ping [ms]: avg 140.5 - min 140.2 (99.8%), max 142.2 (101.2%) US SEA speedtest.sea11.us.leaseweb.net [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 71.9 - min 26.9 (37.4%), max 84.0 (116.8%) Ping [ms]: avg 139.8 - min 137.2 (98.2%), max 140.8 (100.7%) Web ping [ms]: avg 139.9 - min 137.2 (98.1%), max 141.6 (101.2%) BR SPA mirror.ufscar.br [F: 2] DL [Mb/s]: avg 45.1 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 54.2 (120.3%) Ping [ms]: avg 210.1 - min 208.6 (99.3%), max 211.6 (100.7%) Web ping [ms]: avg 220.8 - min 209.8 (95.0%), max 252.6 (114.4%) BR CUR archlinux.c3sl.ufpr.br [F: 0] DL [Mb/s]: avg 46.7 - min 22.3 (47.7%), max 52.6 (112.6%) Ping [ms]: avg 211.8 - min 210.0 (99.1%), max 251.9 (118.9%) Web ping [ms]: avg 221.6 - min 210.2 (94.9%), max 264.3 (119.3%) CL SAN elmirror.cl [F: 3] DL [Mb/s]: avg 45.2 - min 0.0 (0.0%), max 54.4 (120.3%) Ping [ms]: avg 217.2 - min 216.2 (99.5%), max 237.8 (109.5%) Web ping [ms]: avg 225.5 - min 216.2 (95.9%), max 267.1 (118.4%) Europe - Very nice indeed. And a few results above 1 Gb/s which confirms that the node has a 10 Gb/s pipe (or 5 Gb/s but I guess professional providers like Leaseweb don't play around but go directly from 1 Gb/s to 10 Gb/s. Asia / Oceania - Hmmm, IN, Mumbai quite weak, SGP and HongKong not really strong as well but some quite fast China targets. Japan and Straya also mediocre. Let me put it like this: if good Asia / Oceania connectivity is what you need I'd look elsewhere. Africa - half-cooked. One target quite decent, the other quite poor. Americas - When I see east-coast targets at about 125 Mb/s and Chicago at about 120 Mb/s (from Europe) I know I'm looking at a winner wrt cross-Atlantic connectivity. California at about 80 Mb/s is quite decent as well. What I also find really noteworthy are decent results on both south-american coasts. Summary/verdict: a really nice VPS with excellent connectivity within Europe and to North-America. Asia / Oceania is the only bitter pill wrt connectivity. Clearly recommended and even a cheapie for what you get (as long as you can live with mediocre Asia / Oceania connectivity and a bit of risk wrt your data, until the upgrade is complete for all nodes). But there's also the Leaseweb "original" version! And there were a few discussions recently about which version is more attractive, which triggered this examination and thread. To avoid misunderstandings: based on what I know both products (HD and LW VPS) use the same colo and network. HostDZire's product has/runs on its own hardware however - *that's it, that's the difference (modulo temporarily some non-RAID disks). Well, the first thing that triggered my interest is the price difference and AFAIK it's hefty ($47/yr for LW, $26/yr for HD IIRC). So obviously the question arises what morer or betterer do you get for almost double the $$ (from LW)? Let's have a good close look. And yes, of course I also benchmarked the Leaseweb version! Here's the results, based on > 30 runs. Version 2.5.0a, (c) 2018+ jsg (->lowendtalk.com) Machine: amd64, Arch.: amd64, Model: AMD EPYC Processor OS, version: FreeBSD 14.4, Mem.: 5.989 GB CPU - Cores: 4, Family/Model/Stepping: 23/1/2 Cache: 32K/64K L1d/L1i, 512K L2, 8M L3 Std. Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 cflsh mmx fxsr sse sse2 htt sse3 pclmulqdq ssse3 fma cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt aes xsave osxsave avx f16c rdrnd hypervisor Ext. Flags: syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm lahf_lm cmp_legacy cr8_legacy lzcnt sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw topoext AES? Yes Nested Virt.? No HW RNG? Yes ProcMem SC [MB/s]: avg 236.6 - min 93.1 (39.4 %), max 383.1 (161.9 %) ProcMem MA [MB/s]: avg 806.8 - min 574.6 (71.2 %), max 1070.0 (132.6 %) ProcMem MB [MB/s]: avg 953.4 - min 673.5 (70.6 %), max 1120.0 (117.5 %) ProcMem AES [MB/s]: avg 1133.7 - min 1059.3 (93.4 %), max 1179.2 (104.0 %) ProcMem RSA [kp/s]: avg 101.9 - min 93.1 (91.4 %), max 109.0 (107.0 %) Very little difference at first glance. But there's an interesting detail: Single core performance on Leaseweb is (slightly) better while multi-core performance is better on the HostDZire version. Interesting. How come? Hint: Look at the L1 and L3 caches of both! LW has a larger L1i cache (64 KB vs 32 KB) which translates to faster single-core performance, while HD has a giant L3 cache, which leads to higher multi-threading performance. I personally prefer HostDZire's approach. Simple reason: A VPS node almost always has many VPSs and with quite different workloads and lots and lots of task switches. L2 can't help a whole lot if there are more than 8 VPS on a node (512KB div 64KB = 8 (graciously ignoring the 32KB L1d)) and that view still is almost idiotically in favour of LW because it assumes that each VPS does exactly the same task, i.e. internal task switches don't invalidate L1. A massive L3 cache though can and does buffer a significant parts of (very time expensive) DRAM accesses which significantly benefits VPS nodes (as the results show). processor & memory summary: HostDZire's processor choice is clearly (and demonstrably) better. Now, let's look at the disk. --- Disk 4 KB - Buffered --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 8.25 - min 7.68 (93.0%), max 9.17 (111.1%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 8.12 - min 7.70 (94.9%), max 8.68 (106.9%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 23.84 - min 22.07 (92.6%), max 25.06 (105.1%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 21.20 - min 19.76 (93.2%), max 23.20 (109.4%) --- Disk 4 KB - Sync/Direct --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 8.23 - min 7.75 (94.1%), max 8.87 (107.7%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 8.09 - min 7.48 (92.5%), max 8.54 (105.6%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 23.74 - min 22.27 (93.8%), max 25.05 (105.5%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 21.13 - min 19.00 (89.9%), max 22.39 (105.9%) --- Disk 64 KB - Buffered --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 76.18 - min 59.20 (77.7%), max 83.04 (109.0%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 83.59 - min 79.16 (94.7%), max 88.20 (105.5%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 2846.76 - min 2627.32 (92.3%), max 3006.36 (105.6%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 294.03 - min 269.53 (91.7%), max 312.96 (106.4%) --- Disk 64 KB - Sync/Direct --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 7.75 - min 6.46 (83.4%), max 9.24 (119.3%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 4.16 - min 3.59 (86.2%), max 4.87 (117.0%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 2829.59 - min 2594.43 (91.7%), max 3082.77 (108.9%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 292.52 - min 271.14 (92.7%), max 310.11 (106.0%) --- Disk 1 MB - Buffered --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 111.54 - min 76.28 (68.4%), max 119.04 (106.7%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 218.73 - min 201.14 (92.0%), max 237.75 (108.7%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 4374.31 - min 4199.96 (96.0%), max 4641.00 (106.1%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 1342.01 - min 1087.97 (81.1%), max 1563.24 (116.5%) --- Disk 1 MB - Sync/Direct --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 27.23 - min 24.82 (91.2%), max 29.53 (108.5%) Write rnd. [MB/s]: avg 17.60 - min 16.23 (92.2%), max 18.70 (106.2%) Read seq. [MB/s]: avg 4383.68 - min 4141.23 (94.5%), max 4547.53 (103.7%) Read rnd. [MB/s]: avg 1348.34 - min 1217.51 (90.3%), max 1622.98 (120.4%) --- Disk IOps (Sync/Direct) --- Write seq. [MB/s]: avg 27.52 - min 26.55 (96.5%), max 28.66 (104.2%) IOps : avg 7044.35 - min 6797.06 (96.5%), max 7337.33 (104.2%) HostDZire's disk clearly is significantly faster - but: Leaseweb's disk is roughly in the same ballpark and by no means crappy. Plus, albeit only temporary, Leaseweb's disk is RAID'ed while HostDZire hasn't completed their upgrade process yet (AFAIK). TL;DR / verdict I'll put it like this: as I'm not running critical business stuff on that VPS (in fact on most of my VPS) I'm not really disturbed by not all of HD's nodes having RAID yet (mine is RAID'ed though, lucky me *g). HostDZire's version IMO has a better processor & memory combo, a faster disk (again: modulo not yet RAID on all nodes), exactly the same connectivity as LW, and is in fact in the same colo as well. And is way cheaper ! Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Leaseweb fan and certainly not inclined to bash them in any way! But at the end of the day I get more performance for a much lower price with the HostDZire VPS version. So, I sincerely thank HostDZire for providing a LW VPS to me for benchmarking, but I'll give it back and keep my NL, AMS HostDZire VPS . It's better and cheaper, simple as that.

I am an admin for an ERP/PPM platform with tens of thousands of users. since the MCP has been available, and our org is largely encouraged to adopt AI, we suddenly have thousands of solution architects, all building their dream solutions with help from AI. now my team rarely hears from the users to build artifacts to support their processes because to whatever extent possible they are self-serving. The problem is, they are all doing so in a vacuum, and the environment becomes hyper fragmented with thousands of custom built solutions. and this is even with us disallowing write access from the MCP. our position has been that anyone should be able to build insights and visualizations from their data, but there aren’t enough safeguards in place to prevent LLMs from creating or updating records that are very process-sensitive. as you can imagine, no one is hated more than us in the org right now for putting this barrier to success in their way. eventually, we will have to enable it because there is so much pressure. I guess what I’m wondering is what even is the role of a sys admin now if everyone is given the keys to develop their own solutions? my team used to enjoy the respect of our users for having deep expertise in the platform we support. Now we’re just treated like glorified license provisioners and success blockers because we don’t agree that they should be designing custom interfaces that completely replace the actual app UI, simply because the user believes they are now an expert and they know better. submitted by /u/Bamboodl [link] [comments]

I wanted to ask if anyone else experienced issues with Knowbe4's PhishRIP tool yesterday? For those of you who don't know, as the name suggests, it is a tool designed to let you remove phishing emails from user's inboxes. You select one or more parameters (sender, recipient, subject, etc) and it runs the query through exchange and moves any emails that match into a quarantine folder. However, yesterday some sort of freak incident occurred, and I'm not sure what you would even call it. But what happened was I submitted a query at 1:08pm EST looking for emails from a specific domain that had sent a handful of phishing emails. However, something caused the query to be processed with no parameters at all. So the query that went to Exchange was to find and quarantine any email. Which is what it attempted to do; it started going through every inbox at our organization (all 4900 employees) and moving their emails into a hidden quarantine folder. And because they do not allow customers to stop queries or bulk restore emails, we were pretty much helpless. If you have ever tried working with KB4 support, you'll know how terrible they can be, so currently I have no answers. I'm not clear if an issue with Exchange at that moment caused the query to process without any variables, or if KB4 sent it to Exchange completely blank due to some bizarre issue on their end. When I finally got someone at support to answer, even their entry level support did not have access to stop the query or restore the emails in bulk. They had to reach out to another team to do this and this took hours. But it was necessary because it only allows you to restore 200 at a time, which is not practical for close to a million emails. The query eventually ran its course at the end of the day, and they did something on the back end to start restoring emails. But many failed and needed to be manually restored. I was able to confirm with them that this issue did impact other customers, and they had an incident open for it (it has no useful details, but if you are curious you can find it by googling knowbe4 status, then look under past incidents). But so far I cannot find anyone else talking about the issue. This has me thinking that it only impacted customers who ran queries during a very short time window, since I had run a query around 10 minutes before this, and another one 6 minutes after and they worked correctly. It is baffling to me that they did not have any basic measures in place to prevent something like this from happening. Since the platform is meant for phishing emails and should not need to recall that many at once, I would have at the very least put limits on the back end that would stop the query if it exceeded a certain number of emails (maybe 1000), or if it tried to run for more than an hour. Because in the end, the query moved close to a million emails and ran for over 11 hours before it completed. So TLDR: I'm hoping maybe someone else got more information from support on this Knowbe4 PhishRIP issue, or possibly knows more in depth how these queries actually run and identified the root cause? (Also apologies if this post is too ramble-y; I normally try to solve problems myself, but I haven't been involved in a critical system like this since I broke a print server with a driver update at my first job) submitted by /u/CholoBurrito [link] [comments]