Datacenter da Costa Leste

Comentários (15)

1. 
   c1i77 February 19, 2007 at 3:09 am

   Hi Chris,

   It really is nice seeing Linode.com expanding out even further at your typically cautious rate :-).

   [quote:ad4e5ae343=”caker”]… For latency comparison, you can ping 64.22.71.1 …
   [/quote]

   Nice — from AMSIX (Amsterdam):

   105ms … AtlantaNAP
   160ms … HE.net Fremont

   [quote:ad4e5ae343=”caker”]… Please open a support ticket if you’re interested in migrating to that datacenter.
   [/quote]

   Would migrating help with max bandwidth? The best I ever get when downloading from Fremont is round 200kbyte/sec. A test this morning (UTC) got me an average of 183kbyte/sec downloading a 30MB file[*]. It will definitely be worth the trouble if Linode/AtlantaNAP can improve on that.

   Cliff

   [*] For comparison a few minutes later I got an average 1.28Mbyte/sec from kernel.org — max 1.96 Mbyte/sec, the top-speed of my ADSL line.

   EDIT (Feb-22): After migrating to the Atlanta DC, my download rate improved by more than 35%. The same 30MB file downloaded at 250k/s average (254k/s max).

   [i]Hopefully it doesn’t degrade over time.[/i]

   Reply
2. 
   TehDan February 19, 2007 at 10:04 am

   Great news!

   I assume this will require a change of IP?

   Reply
3. 
   Shermozle February 19, 2007 at 5:59 pm

   I thought about migrating to the West Coast data centre a while back, since it’d be closer to the fibres to Australia. Thing is, it’s 20-30ms less ping, so not worth the effort.

   Besides which, one of these days everything West of the San Andreas is gonna go kersplash and become Arizona Bay*. Better to be in Texas then, I reckon, though I suspect it might not do good things to connectivity to .au

   *: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_Bay

   Reply
4. 
   smiffy February 19, 2007 at 11:52 pm

   From Australia, ssh session from Fremont is slightly faster than Dallas, but both are quite useable – I’ve got slower responses from some of the older boxes on my LAN!

   And The Big One is more likely to hit Southern California, from what I read last – may not affect Hurricane Electric too much.

   Reply
5. 
   tronic February 21, 2007 at 4:33 am

   [quote:809d535859=”TehDan”]Great news!

   I assume this will require a change of IP?[/quote]

   Yup, since you’d be changing to a new data center.

   Reply
6. 
   ross February 21, 2007 at 10:23 am

   Is this the major announcement hinted at within the RAM upgrade thread?

   No complaints, just wondering.

   Reply
7. 
   tasaro February 21, 2007 at 10:30 am

   This is [b]not[/b] the major announcement hinted at within the RAM upgrade thread. . .

   Reply
8. 
   Xan February 21, 2007 at 12:32 pm

   tasaro,

   I haven’t had a chance to say welcome, and how it’s nice to have another Linode staff member to help us out around here.

   I’d like to suggest that you pick some distinctive avatar for the forums. We can all recognize Caker and Mike at a glance. My first reaction to your post here was "why would this guy know anything about it" until I caught the "Linode Staff" by your name. An avatar we could recognize would really help us to know when we’re seeing an "official" response.

   Edit: Funny, mine’s not showing up on this post, and I can’t go look at my profile without a prompt. Maybe there’s some problem with the forum at the moment, and if so, please ignore me!

   Reply
9. 
   c1i77 February 22, 2007 at 6:12 am

   Hi,

   I just migrated my bundle of images to Atlanta. SSH’ing feels a lot snappier than Amsterdam<->Fremont.

   FWIW, for others who are thinking of migrating their Linode(s), here are some of the notes I made:

   * See Aaron’s post about [url=https://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2625]"Filtered ports at new datacenter"[/url].

   * Prior to starting migration, set TTL in DNS to a low number for affected domains (Zoneedit.com permits a TTL 1200 [20mins] under "Configure SOA"). Ideally, wait for old TTL to expire before commencing the migration.

   * transfer rate — between 0800 and 1000 UTC — Fremont -> Atlanta was roughly 40-50MB/min (1GB ~25mins) .

   * disk image transfers are uncompressed, so shrink underutilized disk images to speed up the migration.

   * New hosts are Ubuntu-based
   (Linux hostXX.atlanta.linode.com 2.6.16.36-2-bigmem #1 SMP Tue Dec 26 13:58:52 EST 2006 i686 GNU/Linux).

   * Reverse DNS and authorized keys have to be set again.

   * After migrating, set TTL in DNS SOA to a more reasonable number again (e.g. 8600 = 1 day).

   [EDIT: Feb-22]

   * Replaced http://ftp.us.debian.org in /etc/apt/sources.list with http://ftp-mirror.internap.com/pub/debian/ — a mere 3.2ms ping time away. This source also mirrors Ubuntu.)

   Cliff

   Reply
10. 
    SteveG February 22, 2007 at 5:51 pm

    [quote:a0d209275a=”c1i77″]
    (Lots of good stuff I snipped)

    * After migrating, set TTL in DNS SOA to a more reasonable number again (e.g. 8600 = 1 day).[/quote]

    I assume that’s a typo for 86400 = 1 day?

    Reply
11. 
    c1i77 February 23, 2007 at 12:54 am

    [quote:4c48e3bc11=”SteveG”]I assume that’s a typo for 86400 = 1 day?[/quote]

    Yes, you’re right. Thanks for the heads-up — I had in fact repeated it in my DNS. 😳

    Now set to the proper number for one day: 86400

    Cliff

    Reply
12. 
    tofu February 25, 2007 at 2:50 pm

    Caker, could you please put a test file on a server in the new datacenter, so I can test the download speed?
    I live in Belgium and want to see if I get a higher speed then on host 44 where I am now.
    There is not much difference in the ping (now: 126 new DC: 111)

    Reply
13. 
    monarch March 1, 2007 at 10:56 am

    [b]Summary[/b]

    It is about 64ms quicker from London to the East Coast (124ms) than the West Coast (188ms).

    This is good news for European customers..!

    From [b]London[/b] to [b]East Coast[/b] Linode:
    [code]traceroute to 64.22.71.1 (64.22.71.1), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 laptop (192.168.0.9) 2.283 ms 0.617 ms 0.616 ms
    2 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 8.021 ms 3.058 ms 2.635 ms
    3 89.242.240.1 (89.242.240.1) 31.365 ms * 31.854 ms
    4 lg-200-413.rtr001.bre.opaltelecom.net (62.24.252.69) 33.163 ms 32.697 ms 34.440 ms
    5 gig-9-1-rtr001.hex.opaltelecom.net (62.24.254.10) 32.868 ms 60.527 ms 33.895 ms
    6 gig0-1-rtr002.hex.opaltelecom.net (62.24.196.38) 36.238 ms 33.155 ms 34.158 ms
    7 195.66.226.167 (195.66.226.167) 33.729 ms 34.509 ms 84.530 ms
    8 gnax.ge2-3.br01.atl01.pccwbtn.net (63.216.31.158) 122.409 ms 120.595 ms 122.019 ms
    9 atl-core-e-gi4-4.gnax.net (209.51.131.30) 122.759 ms 122.463 ms 122.824 ms
    10 atl-core-a-tgi2-1.gnax.net (209.51.149.105) 122.064 ms 173.207 ms 121.832 ms
    11 l3-atl-18.gnax.net (209.51.131.74) 122.770 ms 122.131 ms *[/code]

    From [b]London[/b] to [b]West Coast[/b] Linode:
    [code]traceroute to ns.tuberant.com (64.62.190.85), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 laptop (192.168.0.9) 1.499 ms 24.136 ms 24.991 ms
    2 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 3.168 ms 2.869 ms 2.469 ms
    3 89.242.240.1 (89.242.240.1) 34.192 ms 36.496 ms 33.288 ms
    4 lg-200-413.rtr001.bre.opaltelecom.net (62.24.252.69) 42.925 ms 31.588 ms 32.567 ms
    5 * gig-9-1-rtr001.hex.opaltelecom.net (62.24.254.10) 33.238 ms 33.824 ms
    6 gig0-0-rtr002.hex.opaltelecom.net (62.24.196.34) 33.830 ms 32.489 ms 31.438 ms
    7 lon.he.net (195.66.226.21) 34.262 ms 52.737 ms 34.409 ms
    8 pos4-1.gsr12416.nyc.he.net (216.218.200.101) 193.600 ms 115.531 ms 204.243 ms
    9 pos11-0.gsr12416.pao.he.net (216.218.227.225) 189.209 ms 187.628 ms 186.765 ms
    10 pos5-0.gsr12416.fmt.he.net (216.218.229.33) 186.706 ms 187.115 ms 209.602 ms
    11 216.218.217.182 (216.218.217.182) 186.483 ms 199.948 ms 196.921 ms
    12 li3-85.members.linode.com (64.62.190.85) 187.769 ms 187.837 ms 186.804 ms[/code]

    [i]Update[/i]: corrected some spelling

    Reply
14. 
    tofu March 3, 2007 at 11:36 am

    [quote:4f0f29e2c3=”tofu”]Caker, could you please put a test file on a server in the new datacenter, so I can test the download speed?
    I live in Belgium and want to see if I get a higher speed then on host 44 where I am now.
    There is not much difference in the ping (now: 126 new DC: 111)[/quote][url]https://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2636[/url]

    Reply
15. 
    Quik March 6, 2007 at 9:03 am

    Thanks for your notes c1i77, they were very helpful.. I have now migrated from Dallas to Atlanta without a hitch (thanks Tom!). Here are a few notes to supplement the ones above..

    The new hosts seem to be about twice as fast as the old Dallas hosts, judging by the significant drop I’ve observed in the dashboard CPU graphs (my Linode is still running exactly the same services and under the same load).

    It is a good idea to run a grep on your entire /etc directory for your old IPs before migrating. I had bound a number of services (apache, mysql) to specific IP addresses and had also configured manual networking – all these things needed changing.

    The filtered ports at Atlanta are an issue. Be sure to check the [url=https://www.linode.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2625]list[/url] before migrating, and remember that they apply to both incoming and outgoing communications.

    Last (and probably least), there don’t seem to be any nameservers provided by Linode at Atlanta, the nearest being at Dallas (only 30ms away anyway). I guess we could use public ones instead but I have yet to look for any of these.

    Reply