We are in the process of migrating this forum. A new space will be available soon. We are sorry for the inconvenience.

Amdec


oles@ovh.net
12-28-2009, 03:06 PM
Hello,
We are conducting an internal debate that is now expanding to find out the opinions of our customers on this issue.

Ovh offers product lines that are fairly Linear (domains, hosting, rps, dedicated hosting) but also a linear range SP, EG, MG, HG. We
quickly understand that dedicated is better than RPS and that MG is better than EG.

We want to create new products that are not Linear. They will be there to respond to specific needs. For example, for memcache
there is no need of CPU or disk, but lots of RAM. For storage backup alot of disk space is needed while performance is not so important, while in production storage it is the inverse.

We came to the idea of creating "standard" performance servers. Something equivalent to "A B C D E" which can be seen in trade. The purpose is to highlight the performance of certain components that are used in certain ranges and respond well to certain questions:
- "Why the server is less expensive than this one"
- "Why that server is more expensive than this one"
- "Why is it better?"
- "What is it worse?".

For example, the performance of disks between
- SATA2 5400RPM
- SATA2 7200 rpm
- SAS 7200 RPM
- SAS 15000tr/min
- E SATA2 Intel SSD 80Go/160Go
- Intel SSD SATA2 M 32Go/64Go
are not the same. And the same goes for iSCSI / FCoE and NFS / CIFS.
But also on the CPU, network, firewall etc.. See hosting ...

The performance is already not bad, but we continued to think and as we said we want to include in this reflection "risk". Basically, give information on the risks, probability of failure and known encryption information. So, each client may use this information to make the best choices, from the solutions that OVH proposes, based on their own mandate. We believe in the methods derived directly from the car and railway industry called FMECA (Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis).
More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FMECA

We believe that such information would allow for better information than what Ovh proposes exactly. Already this would adjust your budget to your needs. Avoiding purchase of unnecessary additions that you do not need. And in contrast allow you to use your budget on other things that are important to you. Such information are normal in B2B relationships because there is total transparency of contracts which lets you know exactlywhat to expect. And we have more and more customers who
ask us to sign commitments. When reading your feedback, it was not bad regarding new ideas about new products. The problem is that in a "non linear" range which is specialises in task servers, it can be confusing to see or distrust the "cheap", the "dear", the "cheapest" and the "dearest". And therefore we need more transparency. If tomorrow you see a server with 24TB of disk for 30euro, you will say "where is the trick?". That is what we want to avoid by bringing forth the answers, the solutions are there and you will not need to seek tiny explanations on the bottom of page ...

What do you think? If you have any experience with FMEA and if you want, please contact me also (oles@ovh.net).

All the best

Octave