I started migrating my servers from Linode to Hetzner Cloud this month, but noticed that my quota only gave me ten instances.
I need many more, probably on the order of 25 right now and probably more later. I’d also like the ability to create test servers, etc.
I asked for an increase with all of that in mind, and Hetzner replied:
“As we try to protect our resources we are raising limits step by step and on the actuall [sic] requirement. Please tell us your currently needed limit.”
I don’t understand. Does Hetzner not have enough servers to accommodate me? Wouldn’t knowing the size of the server be relevant if it’s an actual resource question?
I manage a very large OpenStack cluster for my day job and we just give people what they pay for. I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around this unless Hetzner might not be able to give me what I ultimately want to pay for, and if that’s the case, I wonder if they’re the right solution for me after all.
It also makes me worry about cloud elasticity.
Does anyone have any insights that can help me understand why keeping a low limit matters?
In general everyone should use 1-2 servers, 10 is not exactly a low number. Even in the most boring players like AWS, using 1 month and paying the bill will already give you higher limits.
My identity infrastructure alone uses a whole bunch of servers.
There are the three Kerberos servers, the two clusters of multiple LDAP servers behind HAProxy, the rabbitmq servers to pass requests around, the web servers also balanced/HA behind HAProxy… For me, service reliability and security are two of the biggest factors, so I isolate services and use HA when available.
it wasn’t a criticism of your project, it’s just a layer of security for these companies. you asked for a raise and they apparently responded promptly.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !selfhosted@lemmy.world
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.
Rules:
Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it’s not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don’t duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.
Resources:
selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
Why not renting a few machines and virtualizing yourself? Can you install ESXi on a Hetzner server?
In general everyone should use 1-2 servers, 10 is not exactly a low number. Even in the most boring players like AWS, using 1 month and paying the bill will already give you higher limits.
My identity infrastructure alone uses a whole bunch of servers.
There are the three Kerberos servers, the two clusters of multiple LDAP servers behind HAProxy, the rabbitmq servers to pass requests around, the web servers also balanced/HA behind HAProxy… For me, service reliability and security are two of the biggest factors, so I isolate services and use HA when available.
it wasn’t a criticism of your project, it’s just a layer of security for these companies. you asked for a raise and they apparently responded promptly.
I had no problems communicating a higher limit. They are not AWS but you can get 100s of instances.