CloudHarmony Blog

Great tool! CloudHarmony is good too: https://cloudharmony.com/

You can run benchmarks using https://cloudharmony.com but it looks like there site is having issues right now.

S3 SLA is actually for only three nines (99.9%) or 8.76 hours / year or 43.8 minutes / month of downtime: https://aws.amazon.com/s3/sla/ CloudFront offers the same availability. Many CDNs offer no more than three nines. Some claim 100%, but there will eventually be faults. Most do really well to not have recognized outages, but I nonetheless think they offer 100% to guarantee so that you always get credit for any downtime rather than guaranteeing they are never down. You can look at replicating files to multiple providers; the following shows what kind of uptimes you can expect from the big players: https://cloudharmony.com/status-1year-of-storage If you can live with read-only states with CDN; a similar report: https://cloudharmony.com/status-1year-of-cdn

I hear many great things about Fastly from users, but whenever I look at CDN performance comparisons (e.g. https://cloudharmony.com/reports/editions/cdn-performance-report/basic… they never do brilliantly for US/EU regions. What gives?

https://cloudharmony.com/ does to some extent, though it's not exactly what your talking about

One that not many people seem to know about but which interests me significantly is http://www.instacompute.com/. It's run by Tata, which is pretty massive plus according to http://cloudharmony.com/ it's got pretty good performance, especially considering the price. I guess problem for most of you (it seems pretty US centered around here) may be that they don't have a presence in the United States (they're good in Europe, Asia and India though). Anyone have any experiences with them?

There are at least two tools which are very useful in such comparisons - http://www.cloudorado.com for pricing, and http://cloudharmony.com/ for benchmarks.

Namecheap is a fabulous hosting provider. Love 'em. That said, highly-redundant DDOS-resistant DNS infrastructure is not their focus--they offer it as a free service with hosting, but it's best to cough up a few extra bucks and move your DNS to something more robust with AnyCast (DNS Made Easy, Route53...) when you can if uptime's important to you. Check this out for real-time query speed testing: http://cloudharmony.com/dnstest (And yeah, looks like GoDaddy is a solid "Test failed" still...) Funny note after running the test a few times--the worst performing provider is the one whose salespeople contact me the most...

We co-locate with their parent company Liquid Web and have conducted extensive testing of their cloud services. They are a very solid service, knowledgable technical staff, very quick support response, great hardware, excellent reliability, and reasonable prices. We've been monitoring Storm for 2 years with 100% availability in 2 of their 3 regions: http://cloudharmony.com/status

http://cloudharmony.com/ has at least as extensive benchmarks, and includes other cloud providers.

Welp, there's a lot that needs addressing in this comment, but I'll stick to the heavy-hitters. > they've had near daily network interruptions due to DDoS attacks since Christmas of last year, with some outages lasting up to almost a day Whoa, nope[1]. > It also leaves them highly vulnerable to DDoS attacks through exchanges. We aggressively de-peer with networks that regularly originate attack traffic, allowing us to size our ports according to utilization rather than worst case attack sizes. Multilateral peering is actually a bit more expensive than transit these days - much more expensive if you intend to significantly overprovision capacity. > Who else can you name that utilizes up to 7 transit providers in a given city That's fair, but missing context. We're figuring out who works best for our traffic profile. We will scale back/remove the underperformers and scale up those that prove their worth. > It's not cost effective, is sub-optimal for resiliency against attacks, and fails to leverage peering effectively. All of this is dramatically incorrect. [1] https://cloudharmony.com/status

<disclaimer>I'm from Dyn.</disclaimer> We're thrilled to see a new DNS performance monitoring tool in the public domain. It takes courage to release things like this to the world and open them up for critique, I applaud jimaek, the author, for doing just that. As many have noted, the results are highly varied from many of the other reports we see today but more locations and tests are going to continue to improve accuracy. The testing is synthetic, that is, it's run from within datacenters. I'd encourage anyone who can help provide/sponsor a VPS or resources to also do so. Providing consistent benchmarks against Authoritive Queries from know locations is great but the test network itself needs to expand to get truly meaningful comparisons between providers. I'd hope to see real-user data also get added in the future, that is, testing on the end of home cable/broadband connections, these tests perform differently to synthetic tests but represent end-user experience more accurately. It would also be great to see raw lookup performance between providers, exclusive of network latency. For those interested in diving deeper into DNS performance, I'd also recommend reviewing Cloud Harmony's reports, the latest of which can be found here: https://cloudharmony.com/reports/state-of-the-cloud-dns-0315-report

For IAAS providers, you should care about the uptime of the regions (datacenter) that you are planning to use and the uptime of the specific services that your vms will use within those datacenters. In particular, I recommend paying close attention to the monthly/quarterly uptime trend in addition to aggregate uptime numbers. And if you really care, try and find out the datacenter(s) your providers will be using and find out the historic performance of their different infrastructure and redundancy providers, and how often they actually test and upgrade their systems. Look at the difference now when I filter by region and add the region data to the chart... it clearly shows just how hard these comparisons can be: Provider Uptime Outages Regions Total Downtime ---------------------- -------- ------- -------- -------------- Google Compute Engine 100% 0 1 0 hours Amazon EC2 99.9984% 7 3 0.13 hours Microsoft Azure VMs 99.942% 56 6 2.89 hours https://cloudharmony.com/status-1year-of-compute-in-america_north-grou…

AWS and GCP both have ~100% uptime in every region for VMs this month. Meanwhile the majority of Azure regions have had various outages in the same period: https://cloudharmony.com/status-of-compute

https://cloudharmony.com/status-for-dyn is now (12:43pm EDT) showing Dyn's "US East" and "US West" centers as being down. Anyone know anything about this Cloudharmony service? How often does it update? and what is it monitoring?

From where I'm looking at the internet (central Europe), I don't notice anything. Maybe your internet on the other side of the Atlantic is broken, ours seems to be working fine. ;-) Edit: Looks like the eastern part of the USA is affected: https://cloudharmony.com/status-for-dyn

The closest I've seen to that is this page: https://cloudharmony.com/status-group-provider

According to that site, I can't get less than 44ms with Amazon where I live... This site has a much larger number of providers: http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest-latency-for-compute-limit-10m But of course most of them don't offer GPU servers.

Check out http://www.cloudharmony.com/benchmarks for something with more current data.

I don't think that iCloud has a better uptime than Amazon Web Services: https://cloudharmony.com/provider/aws#aws:ec2

According to this audit EC2 had just 2.14 total hours downtime last year, the least of any major provider by region. https://cloudharmony.com/status-1year-group-by-regions This is HN.. You shouldn't use dodgy language like "seemingly" to avoid doing homework and citing sources.

Bigger, faster, more open, more secure ... what's missing from this list? Oh, that's right, how about more uptime? Provider Outages Total Downtime ---------------------- -------- -------------- Amazon EC2 12 2.01 hours Google Compute Engine 65 3.27 hours Microsoft Azure VMs 102 42.80 hours Source: https://cloudharmony.com/status-1year-of-compute-group-by-regions-and-… And this doesn't show the other Microsoft cloud services that have even worse reliability. At my company we invested a lot of time trying to make Azure Service Bus and Visual Studio Online work. Both were so dreadfully unreliable as to be unusable.

Cloud Harmony has done some more testing since then which covers some more configurations and you will see Google does quite well - especially if you normalize by price (not in the charts, but prices are public) https://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks/compute/storage#4k_Rand_IOPS https://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks/compute/terasort

According to https://cloudharmony.com/status-1year-for-azure, they didn't reach 99.99%.

Wow, comparing that to AWS is staggering! https://cloudharmony.com/status-for-aws

Another user posted a link to CloudHarmony for speed testing: http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&services_Serve…

Please don't post mystery meat URLs. The bit.ly link goes to: http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest/run?services_CDN=&serviceTypes[]…

There have been a ton of cloud CPU benchmarks, e.g. http://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks If the cloud is implemented properly there should be minimal interference from neighbors, but it would be an interesting thing to check.

Just moved ours to Route 53 in the afternoon. I had been on the fence lately, especially after doing a few of the tests on http://cloudharmony.com/dnstest, but the move so far has been simple, and new relic reports nearly similar results for us.

[17:16:45.286] missing ; before statement @ http://cloudharmony.com/speedtest.js?var=speedtest&callback=1&… <b>Fatal error</b>: Call to a member function getAffiliateOrStandardUrl() on a non-object in <b>/var/dropbox/deploy/cloudharmony/lib/util/CH_SpeedtestUtil.php</b> on line <b>802</b><br /> [17:16:45.352] speedtest is not defined @ http://cloudharmony.com/js/run-speedtest.js:144