jasonhoffman
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:29PM (#2269634)
Yes, you can contact support at help.joyent.com and they'll move your old textdrive account from jervis.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:28PM (#2269630)
Just can't win.
I am reading all the comments, and I'm not spamming the thread. I'm having a conversation on a site that I frequent everyday. This is called being responsive.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:26PM (#2269621)
For example, read the comments below from quintinsykes and chuckmcknight.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:25PM (#2269613)
To even call this "Joyent" is misleading.
The packing system is the same, it's BSD userland. The paths are the same. Everything is the same. The kernel shouldn't matter. And if you had told support that you wanted us to just migrate you because nothing was out of the ordinary, what would they have done? They would have migrated you ....
And this has been quite a good deal for you. The logic of moving from something that costs you nothing to something that does costs you something is interesting.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:21PM (#2269608)
This has absolutely nothing to do with "Joyent Cloud". Nothing. The IaaS product has had 99.999-100% uptime this year. This is a 6 year old sharing hosting product that's currently free.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:08PM (#2269576)
He's currently at "free", so get any more aggressive than that.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:07PM (#2269573)
Thank you, we actually take our support very seriously and we're pretty accessible. He's talking about a different product than what you have.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:06PM (#2269569)
Also incorrect. "About 4 years ago" we always did >99.99% uptimes even on the old textdrive stuff. I'd be happy to show all the old stats and graphs, we still have them.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:05PM (#2269565)
If it was a couple of years ago and for large quantities of bandwidth, then you would have been talking to me. We didn't have "sales people" a couple of years back. And I would have said "No" because we weren't in the business of selling "large quantities of bandwidth"
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:04PM (#2269560)
And there's no reason that you needed to pay additional unless you bought a different product.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @08:03PM (#2269559)
If you're on an old textdrive server, then you need to move, like we've been saying.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @07:59PM (#2269541)
This is correct. We've been offering upgrades to newer stuff. You just need to contact support.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @07:58PM (#2269538)
Not comparable for this.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @07:57PM (#2269535)
Hi. This is Jason Hoffman, Dean's co-founder of Textdrive and current founder at Joyent. If you're worried about your sites on the old Pendrell, then go over to support and take the upgrade that's been offered and migrate off.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @07:55PM (#2269525)
We never pressured anyone to repurchase anything. And switching from a shared hosting product from 2004 to a VPS at Linode. Makes sense but it's not a side-grade.
Re:Joyent: 54+ hours of downtime
on Sunday February 27, 2011 @07:54PM (#2269521)
I get the frustration. I really do and I apologize for any bump like this. I'm the founder of those old textdrive "share hosting" servers (they really have nothing to do with Joyent's current product line). These servers are ~6 years old and they're largely populated by "lifetime" customers who have tricked out various bits of their accounts enough that an automated migration has been basically impossible. We've been telling everyone for 3 years to really get off of them, we've been offering free upgrades for 4 years, including you btw, you got a free upgrade back in Nov 2007, and there's even support tickets detailing it (which you've participated on). So now we're piecing together everything that was left but those good ole FreeBSD UFS file systems take awhile.
Re:Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
on Sunday February 06, 2011 @01:12PM (#2186073)
Yes, Bruno's fundamental point is that "desktop" language VMs will just end a process when there's memory allocation errors. So basically there has to be real means to instrument and error handling has to be robust, he's correct in this assertion.
Re:Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
on Sunday February 06, 2011 @01:06PM (#2186062)
Thank you and it does count.
Re:Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
on Sunday February 06, 2011 @01:06PM (#2186059)
This is happening.
Re:Ask HN: Does Joyent's Slingshot still exist?
on Saturday January 15, 2011 @02:01PM (#2107527)
It's not updated for a current version of Rails but it is completely open sourced.