New FOSSVPS Location -- Bucharest -- Thanks Hosteroid!
Not_Oles
Hosting ProviderContent Writer
New FOSSVPS Location -- Bucharest Hosteroid
- CPU E5-2690 v4
- 256 GB
- 3.6 TiB SSD RAID 10
- Six available IPv4 addresses!
- IPv6/48, so each VPS can have a /64!
Soon! Not yet quite ready for free VPS requests. Please help answer the following questions:
- How should we set up the node to deliver the best user experience while staying fully open source?
- Is it okay to upgrade the node to Debian sid?
- Does anyone want to join FOSSVPS volunteer staff?
- Does anyone want to contribute toward the costs of formal registration for FOSSVPS?
- Does anyone want to contribute server hardware which FOSSVPS can colo?
Thanks Hosteroid! 
root@hosteroid:~# curl -sL yabs.sh | bash
# ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
# Yet-Another-Bench-Script #
# v2025-04-20 #
# https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script #
# ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## #
Mon Oct 6 10:28:40 PM UTC 2025
Basic System Information:
---------------------------------
Uptime : 0 days, 0 hours, 43 minutes
Processor : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v4 @ 2.60GHz
CPU cores : 56 @ 1200.000 MHz
AES-NI : ✔ Enabled
VM-x/AMD-V : ✔ Enabled
RAM : 251.8 GiB
Swap : 3.8 GiB
Disk : 3.6 TiB
Distro : Debian GNU/Linux 13 (trixie)
Kernel : 6.12.48+deb13-amd64
VM Type : NONE
IPv4/IPv6 : ✔ Online / ✔ Online
IPv6 Network Information:
---------------------------------
ISP : Castlegem SRL
ASN : AS34689 Castlegem SRL
Host : HOSTEROID Bucharest
Location : Bucharest, București (B)
Country : Romania
fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/mapper/hosteroid--vg-root):
---------------------------------
Block Size | 4k (IOPS) | 64k (IOPS)
------ | --- ---- | ---- ----
Read | 95.42 MB/s (23.8k) | 918.59 MB/s (14.3k)
Write | 95.68 MB/s (23.9k) | 923.43 MB/s (14.4k)
Total | 191.11 MB/s (47.7k) | 1.84 GB/s (28.7k)
| |
Block Size | 512k (IOPS) | 1m (IOPS)
------ | --- ---- | ---- ----
Read | 793.04 MB/s (1.5k) | 790.33 MB/s (771)
Write | 835.18 MB/s (1.6k) | 842.96 MB/s (823)
Total | 1.62 GB/s (3.1k) | 1.63 GB/s (1.5k)
iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv4):
---------------------------------
Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed | Ping
----- | ----- | ---- | ---- | ----
Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 914 Mbits/sec | 923 Mbits/sec | 41.6 ms
Eranium | Amsterdam, NL (100G) | 924 Mbits/sec | 918 Mbits/sec | 34.2 ms
Uztelecom | Tashkent, UZ (10G) | 871 Mbits/sec | 667 Mbits/sec | 123 ms
Leaseweb | Singapore, SG (10G) | 781 Mbits/sec | 608 Mbits/sec | 179 ms
Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 792 Mbits/sec | 360 Mbits/sec | 163 ms
Leaseweb | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 844 Mbits/sec | 633 Mbits/sec | 109 ms
Edgoo | Sao Paulo, BR (1G) | 651 Mbits/sec | 331 Mbits/sec | 223 ms
iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv6):
---------------------------------
Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed | Ping
----- | ----- | ---- | ---- | ----
Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 902 Mbits/sec | 911 Mbits/sec | 41.3 ms
Eranium | Amsterdam, NL (100G) | 906 Mbits/sec | 906 Mbits/sec | 34.2 ms
Uztelecom | Tashkent, UZ (10G) | 806 Mbits/sec | 587 Mbits/sec | 123 ms
Leaseweb | Singapore, SG (10G) | 772 Mbits/sec | 592 Mbits/sec | 179 ms
Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 794 Mbits/sec | 356 Mbits/sec | 163 ms
Leaseweb | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 405 Mbits/sec | 589 Mbits/sec | 109 ms
Edgoo | Sao Paulo, BR (1G) | 341 Mbits/sec | 309 Mbits/sec | 223 ms
Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test:
---------------------------------
Test | Value
|
Single Core | 1112
Multi Core | 10025
Full Test | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/14307105
YABS completed in 13 min 19 sec
root@hosteroid:~#
I hope everyone gets the servers they want!
Tagged:
Comments
Thank you @Not_Oles
Insert signature here, $5 tip required
I couldn't resist!
I hope everyone gets the servers they want!
Hi Tom,
Because of the way you are growing I would suggest going over to Proxmox would make your job much easier. You are also much more likely (I would volunteer) to get more support / help.
Either way keep up the great work.
Virmach is NOT worth the risk.
@Not_Oles , isn't it dispersive to open a thread for each location?
@msatt
Thanks for your suggestion of Proxmox and for considering volunteering! Both your suggestion and your consideration are great!
I did use Proxmox a few years ago. In 2020, I wrote a few Proxmox tutorials for LES Talk:
How to Create and Setup a Debian KVM VPS with Proxmox VE 6 — Part I — Creation
How to Create and Setup a Debian KVM VPS with Proxmox VE 6 — Part II — Debian Install
How to Create and Setup a Debian KVM VPS with Proxmox VE 6 — Part III — Network Configuration
At the moment, my personal experiment is making KVM VPSes on bare Debian or Ubuntu with cloud-init and virt-install. VPSes made this way do seem to work well. Nevertheless, Proxmox VPSes indeed might be better than the VPSes I am presently making in several ways, including easier administration.
Is it too crazy to imagine that you might want to take over administration of the FOSSVPS London node contributed by OnlyServers,, wipe the node, install Proxmox, refresh existing VPSes for clients interested in continuing, and then administer the London node for FOSSVPS with Proxmox going forward?
I hope everyone gets the servers they want!
@mizzik Yes. How can we make it better?
I hope everyone gets the servers they want!
There is certainly no harm in asking Tom
You have been kind enough to get FOSSVPS up and running and likewise get the very kind contributions from some great providers (thanks OnlyServers et al). So I am also happy to contribute. Lets DM to sort something out.
Virmach is NOT worth the risk.