Mon1125 compare optimizepubliccloud-juliencoulon-cedexis

462 views

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
462
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Mon1125 compare optimizepubliccloud-juliencoulon-cedexis

  1. 1. The experts in Global Multiplatforms Strategy Julien CoulonOctobre 2011 Co-Founder @juliencoulon julien@cedexis.com @cedexis + 33 6 07 13 68 56
  2. 2. About Cedexis• Founded in 2009 by former Akamai Executives• Based in Portland, Oregon and Paris France and funded by Madrona Venture Group an Advanced Technology Ventures• Locations in Portland, San Francisco, Chicago, Paris, London, and Thailand• 250+ customers in 7 countries
  3. 3. Internet traffic is exploding 2.5 30.0 25.0 2.0 20.0 1.5 15.0 1.0 10.0 0.5 5.0 0.0 0.0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Internet Users (B) 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.3 Exabytes/Month 0.4 0.8 1.5 2.4 4.0 6.4 9.9 14.4 20.2 27.5 1 exabyte = 1 billion gigabytes of data
  4. 4. And Expanding Globally
  5. 5. Web Performance Matters 81% Percentage of internet users who abandon a page when a video fails to start immediately 4.9% Yahoo! study’s conclusion of lost sales attributable to a 400ms delay in page load time20% Drop in Google traffic attributable to a 500 ms slowdown 1% Drop in Amazon sales attributable to a 100 ms slowdown
  6. 6. But Varies Dramatically by Location HTTP Response Time ms 0 to 300 (20%) 300 to 400 (25%) 400 to 500 (13%) c 500 to 750 (21%) > 750 (21%)
  7. 7. In 2002, the Solution was Unique Content Delivery Networks
  8. 8. But the Internet is Immense and Complex Countries 218 Networks 32k+
  9. 9. And Even the Largest Providers Cover Only a Small %Akamai Technologies: The $6.6B Market Leader in CDN
  10. 10. Performance is Dependent on Networks
  11. 11. Vendor performance varies by network Provider 1: Provider 2: Provider 3:
  12. 12. Cedexis “Rides the Peaks” Provider 1: Provider 2: Provider 3:
  13. 13. Our Thesis No single platform can provide great performance everywhere…but there are great local providers ! 32k networks worldwide and performance varies widely for users
  14. 14. Our Thesis Maximizing global performance requires a diversified portfolio ! Multi-Cloud is the only way to deliver optimal performance to global users.
  15. 15. Cloud – Hybride-Could – Multi-Cloud – Multi-CDNStory n°1 : Cloud Availability How reliably reachable is Google App Engine from countries/networks around the world?Story n°2 : Cloud Performance Why should I deploy my applications across multiple Azure or EC2 regions?Story n°3 : Blending clouds What combination of providers will deliver the best overall performance in the United States?
  16. 16. Google App Engine: 20 May 201290th Percentile Response Times
  17. 17. Google App Engine: 21 May 201290th Percentile Response Times
  18. 18. Google App Engine: 22 May 201290th Percentile Response Times
  19. 19. Conclusion:AVOID SINGLE-VENDOR DEPENDENCIES
  20. 20. Cloud – Hybride-Could – Multi-Cloud – Multi-CDNStory n°1 : Cloud Availability How reliably reachable is Google App Engine from countries/networks around the world?Story n°2 : Cloud Performance Why should I deploy my applications across multiple Azure or EC2 regions?Story n°3 : Blending clouds What combination of providers will deliver the best overall performance in the United States?
  21. 21. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 1000 1200 200 400 600 800 South Korea Singapore Japan Mexico Puerto RicoDominican Repub Indonesia Ireland Romania New Zealand Switzerland Czech Republic Amazon EC2 : Asia North-Est (Tokyo) Latvia Thailand Austria Croatia France Finland Greece Ecuador Chile Turkey Spain Tunisia Qatar Kuwait Jordan Saudi Arabia Egypt
  22. 22. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 1000 1200 200 400 600 800 1400 Brazil Paraguay Peru Puerto Rico United StatesDominican Repub Hungary Amazon EC2 : US South Switzerland Estonia Serbia Slovenia Latvia Luxembourg Macedonia Austria Norway France Portugal Italy Tunisia Israel Jordan Algeria Hong Kong Lebanon China Libya Sri Lanka Kuwait
  23. 23. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 1000 1200 200 400 600 800 Canada South Korea Costa Rica Taiwan Switzerland Colombia Slovak Republic Moldavia Estonia RomaniaBosnia-Herzegov Belarus 90th Percentile Amazon EC2 : US West (Oregon) Macedonia Ireland Poland Median New Zealand Greece Albania Spain Average Cyprus Venezuela Uruguay BrazilOccupied Palest Malaysia Sri Lanka India Thailand Oman Kuwait
  24. 24. Split of Amazon EC2 based on performanceBest 90th Percentile Response Times
  25. 25. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Belgium Denmark Singapore Czech Republic Latvia Romania Norway Portugal Serbia Slovenia Poland Belarus90th Percentile Greece Spain Turkey Dominican RepubMedian El Salvador Vietnam Colombia Cedexis Multi-Cloud EC2 focus PerformanceAverage Israel Algeria Polynesia Thailand India Uruguay Lebanon Oman Egypt China
  26. 26. WINDOWS AZURE
  27. 27. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 1000 200 400 600 800 1200 Singapore China South Korea India Japan Azure Asie South Est Germany Belgium Qatar Canada Albania Sloveniaovak Republic90th Percentile United States Switzerland RomaniaMedian Latvia Finland Sweden FranceAverage Great Britain Colombia Turkey Guatemala Morocco Libya Peru Venezuela Israel Paraguay South Africa
  28. 28. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 1000 1200 400 600 800 200 Belgium Czech Republic Bulgaria Ireland Azure Europe West Serbia Macedonia Austria Bosnia-Herzegov Moldavia Slovak Republic Greece Italy90th Percentile Portugal Spain United States Puerto RicoMedian Qatar Colombia MoroccoAverage El Salvador Egypt Chile Kuwait Brazil Taiwan Polynesia New Zealand Malaysia Philippines Thailand
  29. 29. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 1000 1200 200 400 600 800 Canada Belgium Azure US South Dominican Repub Costa Rica Denmark El Salvador Lithuania Hungary Croatia Latvia Moldavia Luxembourg90th Percentile Ukraine Norway South Korea AlbaniaMedian Italy Ecuador Russian FederatAverage Venezuela Brazil Algeria Jordan Philippines Saudi Arabia Singapore Lebanon Sri Lanka Indonesia South Africa
  30. 30. Split of Azure Cloud based on performanceBest 90th Percentile Response Times
  31. 31. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 1000 1200 200 400 600 800 Belgium Singapore Denmark Bulgaria Great Britain Latvia Lithuania Sweden Finland Belarus France Portugal90th Percentile Albania United States Spain Russian FederatMedian Thailand Philippines IsraelAverage Colombia India Morocco Cedexis Multi-Cloud Azure focus on Performance Ecuador Peru Saudi Arabia Lebanon Argentina Oman Iraq
  32. 32. CDN - DELIVERY NETWORKS
  33. 33. HTTP Response Time (ms) Cloudfront 0 1000 100 200 400 500 600 700 900 300 800 Belgium Switzerland Finland Romania Hungary Norway France Estonia Singapore Poland Serbia Belarus90th Percentile Greece Albania Turkey Puerto RicoMedian Mexico Costa Rica BrazilAverage Argentina Algeria Polynesia Ecuador Qatar Peru India Sri Lanka Philippines Iraq
  34. 34. Akamai HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 900 800 Belgium Romania Czech Republic Greece Slovak Republic Norway Bulgaria New Zealand Great Britain France Japan Cyprus Macedonia Turkey Spain Colombia IsraelDominican Repub Costa Rica Australia Tunisia Ecuador Thailand Morocco Saudi Arabia Indonesia Venezuela Oman Libya
  35. 35. HTTP Response Time (ms) Limelight 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Belgium Canada Czech Republic Finland Norway Slovak Republic Bulgaria Latvia Singapore Japan Serbia Moldavia90th Percentile Luxembourg Albania Tunisia New ZealandMedian Australia Israel PanamaAverage Morocco Guatemala Taiwan India Peru Sri Lanka Brazil Libya Paraguay Qatar
  36. 36. HTTP Response Time (ms) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Finland Luxembourg Slovenia South Korea Netherlands Czech Republic Portugal Slovak Republic Ukraine Ireland Lithuania Poland90th Percentile Qatar China Egypt MoroccoMedian United States Italy Australia MexicoAverage Chile Malaysia Cedexis : Multi-CDN blend focus on performance El Salvador Philippines India Jordan Occupied Palest Uruguay Lebanon
  37. 37. Cloud – Hybride-Could – Multi-Cloud – Multi-CDNStory n°1 : Cloud Availability How reliably reachable is Google App Engine from countries/networks around the world?Story n°2 : Cloud Performance Why should I deploy my applications across multiple Azure or EC2 regions?Story n°3 : Blending clouds What combination of providers will deliver the best overall performance in the United States?
  38. 38. 1 Clouds Amazon EC2 US East 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Single Source
  39. 39. 2 Clouds Amazon EC2 VoxCloud US East New York 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin
  40. 40. 3 Clouds Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace US East New York CloudServers 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin
  41. 41. 4 Clouds Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure US East New York CloudServers US North 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin
  42. 42. 5 Clouds Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin
  43. 43. Historical Latency-Based Routing Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing
  44. 44. Historical Latency-Based Routing Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing
  45. 45. Historical Latency-Based Routing Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing
  46. 46. Historical Latency-Based Routing Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing
  47. 47. Real-time Data-Driven Routing Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing Real-time Data-Driven Routing
  48. 48. Real-time Data-Driven Routing Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing Real-time Data-Driven Routing
  49. 49. Real-time Data-Driven Routing Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing Real-time Data-Driven Routing
  50. 50. Real-time Data-Driven Routing Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing Real-time Data-Driven Routing
  51. 51. Amazon EC2 VoxCloud Rackspace Azure Azure US East New York CloudServers US North US South 160 140 120 Median Response Time (ms) 100 80 60 40 20 - 1 2 3 4 5 Round Robin Historical Latency Based Routing Real-time Data-Driven RoutingConclusion:NOT ALL BLENDS ARE CREATED EQUAL
  52. 52. Cases StudiesWhat’s the impact for your Business?
  53. 53. Case Study: Euronews • 60% reduction in page load times • 94% cost reduction • Elimination of single-vendor lock-in • Dramatic improvements in SEO Akamai Level 3 + CDNetworks
  54. 54. Direct impacts Page Loading Time par pays 20.0 18.0 16.0 14.0 Secondes 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0APDEX threshold 4.8 seconds 4.0 2.0 - China USA Brazil Thailand Australia France Canada Germany Single-Source 18.6 9.0 8.0 7.7 6.6 4.7 4.7 3.9 Multi-Source 6.8 4.2 4.8 3.5 4.1 3.2 2.8 2.9 5,5 secondes per page improvment
  55. 55. Luxury Website : 1CDN to 4 CDN/Cloud Rest of the world China -25% Bounce rate -22% +9% Page view/visit +15% +20% Session time +16%
  56. 56. Case Study: MassMotion spreads global HD• 4 seconds buffering time reduction• 5,5% HD video increase on local market• Cost reduction optimization• Elimination of single-vendor lock-in
  57. 57. 20 Minutes : regional focus Akamai Akamai + L3 + Cotendo +27%Certified by IP Label : agent at Orange focus on last mile
  58. 58. Case Study: eYeka Audience X 6 in 1 week. 1 CDN + 2 hosting facilities 3 CDN + 2 Hosting facilitiesPerformance improvements certified by Website Pulse
  59. 59. So, what have we learned today? • Single-platform strategies are dangerous • Effective multi-cloud strategies can be hugely beneficial for reaching a global audience160140120100 • Applying real-time telemetry to routing 80 60 decisions unlocks the enormous benefits 40 20 of hybrid cloud or multi-cloud strategies 0 1 2 3 4 5
  60. 60. What We WantTo make the web faster for every user on the planet.
  61. 61. Disaster Recovery: Ensure 100% availability of yourprivate clouds and increase performance
  62. 62. Community MeasurementsHow to collect a billion measurements a day
  63. 63. 1. Publish content and applications on 200+ public and private cloudsPublic IaaS & PaaS Virtualized Global & Regional Platforms Datacenters Delivery Networks
  64. 64. 2. Deploy javascript tag on 250+ community-member websites
  65. 65. 3. Collect end-user telemetry from 34k networks across 230+ countries
  66. 66. 4. Use the data to tell stories… • How reliable is a single Cloud- CDN-Data Center platform? • Why deploy across multiple cloud- CDN-Data Center regions? • What combination of providers will deliver the best performance?
  67. 67. Case Study: Accor 1 CDN 2 CDNCertified by Mercury : Performance X 6 1 CDN 2 CDN 6

×