docoptimizing internet application performance
download 
Report Transcription
optimizing internet application performance
EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE By the Equinix Innovations Team TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction pages 2 Speed 3 Availability & Consistency 3 Platform EquinixSM 4-5 How Do We Test Application Performance? 6 Results 7 Round Trip Time, Traceroutes, Availability, and Predictability Takeaways 1 © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com 7-8 9 EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE By the Equinix Innovations Team In today’s digital economy, performance can be a strategic differentiator for your company. Whether you’re a bank handling millions of clients online, a retailer dependent on your website to drive sales, or a cloud computing company powering enterprises, performance-related end user experience is one of the key criteria on which your company will be judged. There are numerous examples of how performance can impact revenue: ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ Amazon — “Every 100ms delay costs 1% of sales”1 — for 2009 that translates into $245 million Mozilla shaved 2.2 seconds of load time off its landing pages and increased download conversions by 15.4%, translating into an additional 60 million downloads each year2 Microsoft found that an increase of 500ms of delays on its page loads resulted in losing 1.2% in revenue per user 3 When Shopzilla reduced its page load time by 5 seconds, it saw an increase of 25% in page views and a 7-12% increase in revenue4 10ms latency could result in 10% less revenue for U.S. brokerages5 2 © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com Performance isn’t just about the speed of a site; availability and consistency are also important. Being able to deliver consistent, reliable service is fundamental to customer conversion and retention. From frustrated consumers trying to buy gifts for Christmas to multinational companies attempting to do computational modeling, all types of customers become frustrated when websites or cloud services aren’t fast or pages fail to load. Being able to provide your customers a consistent experience, or in the case of the enterprise, to actually guarantee that performance and consistency with a Service Level Agreement (SLA), translates to increased revenue by improving the end user experience and reducing resistance from corporate buyers. In this paper, we describe how leveraging Equinix as the foundation for your services can reduce latency by 15% globally, reduce downtime by up to 80%, and increase predictability, all without having to invest the time or incur the expense to change or redesign your application architecture. 1. http://sites.google.com/site/glinden/Home/StanfordDataMining.2006-11-28.ppt 2. http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/category/website-optimization/ 3. http://en.oreilly.com/velocity2009/public/schedule/detail/8523 4. http://assets.en.oreilly.com/1/event/29/Shopzilla%27s%20Site%20Redo%20-%20 You%20Get%20What%20You%20Measure%20Presentation.ppt 5. http://www.tabbgroup.com/PublicationDetail.aspx?PublicationID=346 EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE SPEED The speed of your site is judged on responsiveness to actions on the page (script requests, image renders, etc.) and on how quickly users can transition from page to page (loading a new page). The elements of speed can be further broken down: the network latency and bandwidth between your end users and your site, the performance of your server infrastructure in responding to a request, and how quickly the user’s browser can render your site based on how the web page is coded. While there is a tremendous body of knowledge on how to increase bandwidth, optimize servers and code web pages, network latency is generally considered immutable. But new studies show that if you reduce latency, it will have a tremendous effect on page load times, even more so than bandwidth, with every 20ms of reduced network latency resulting in a 7-15% decrease in page load times.6 BENEFIT OF ADDING AN EXTRA MBPS BENEFIT OF REDUCING RTT 20% 10% 8% 1,000 RTT (ms) 0 20 60 40 0 80 0 10 0 12 0 16 14 0 0 18 0 20 60 40 0 80 0 10 0 12 0 14 Bandwidth (Mbps) 10 0 9 16 8 0 7 18 6 0 5 22 4 20 3 1,500 500 6% 2 2,500 2,000 0 0% 12% 22 10% 14% 3,500 3,000 20 20% 16% 24 0 30% 4,000 18% Page Load Time (ms) Percent reduction in PLT Percent Improvement 40% PAGE LOAD TIME AS RTT DECREASES RTT (ms) Conventional advice on reducing latency recommends using a third-party provider such as a Content-Delivery Network (CDN) to distribute content and leveraging their infrastructure to get geographically closer to the end user. While a CDN can help accelerate static content and effectively distribute video, the increasingly dynamic nature of the web (social media, real-time API access, etc.) reduces CDN effectiveness, and in a real-time cloud application may not be able to help at all. This study shows how it is possible to reduce network latency across the internet by housing application infrastructure in Equinix data centers and leveraging the unique network density located in them. AVAILABILITY & CONSISTENCY Availability of a website isn’t solely dependent on how well you operate your infrastructure; it is also affected by the performance of your internet service provider (ISP) and other service providers. Disputes between carriers have sometimes resulted in a fragmented internet, with some end users unable to access content while others are unaffected.7 Likewise, achieving consistent site performance is based on an amalgamation of internal factors (e.g., proper capacity planning, load management) and external factors (e.g., internet performance, local traffic). Again, while the principles of optimizing the internal factors are well understood, how to optimize the external factors has seemed to be a secret held by only the largest content providers such as Google or Amazon. In this whitepaper we describe how these large content companies increase their control over external forces, and how your company can reproduce this easily and cost effectively. 3 © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com 6. http://www.belshe.com/2010/05/24/morebandwidth-doesnt-matter-much/ 7. http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/ archives/2008/03/18/cogent-telia-peering-disputewidely-felt/ EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE PLATFORM EQUINIX SM Why do more than 3,600 customers, including the top carriers, CDNs, content providers, and cloud providers choose Equinix as their data center services provider? Equinix provides some of the most reliable, secure facilities in the world, and our long track record of delivering excellent service has earned the trust of top companies’ CTOs and CIOs who know application performance is mission critical. But equally important, Equinix data centers are situated in critical locations throughout the internet, which enables Equinix customers to optimize their end users’ experience. To understand how, let’s quickly review the structure of the internet. First, all ISPs architect their networks with backbone connections engineered as high-speed trunks between key network nodes. Since these backbones are responsible for carrying massive amounts of data and distributing them across the network, they are critical to each carrier. Therefore, carriers devote significant engineering and operational resources to ensure the backbone runs as quickly and with as little contention as possible. By contrast, the regional coverage or non-backbone networks built by that same ISP may have some degree of oversubscription, resulting in unpredictable behavior and network congestion. Second, the physical cables forming these backbone networks generally converge on certain locations due to population density and geographic limitations. In addition, sub-sea cables that connect the world’s continents reach the shore at very distinct locations based on geographic characteristics (away from shipping lanes to prevent cable cuts, but still near major cities), resulting in placement similar or identical to where ISPs locate their backbone networks. To the general public, the internet is a “cloud” they can plug into anywhere, but the fundamental structure of the internet is actually drastically different. The internet is a vast series of interconnected networks that ride on the physical capacity of hundreds of telecom providers. These networks overlap geographically (some major cities have more than 50 networks), and they also share common characteristics. 2010 SUBMARINE CABLE MAP TeleGeography Greenland Sea ARCTIC OCEAN ARCTIC OCEAN GREENLAND Baffin Bay Beaufort Sea Barents Sea CORNWALL Chukchi Sea Apollo TAT-14 Yellow/AC-2 GLO-1 Bude Whitesands Bay AC-1 Skewjack FA-1 FLAG Europe-Asia Porthcurno Goonhilly Downs SeaMeWe-3 ICELAND Reykjavik Norwegian Sea FA Godthab RIC E SWEDEN -3 TAT Anchorage Gree nlan d Conn FINLAND Baltic Sea NORWAY ICE DAN -14 TAT ect Helsinki Oslo ACE GLO-1 WACS Tata TGN-Western Europe SeaMeWe-3 FLAG Europe-Asia Europe India Gatway SA AC T-3 E C-BUS e Curaçao–Trinidad VENEZUELA Am Suriname – Guyana eri cas Ne LA GUINEA BISSAU N t LIBERIA GLO-1 Jap FRENCH GUIANA an Main One TOGO COTE D'IVOIRE GHANA Abidjan Accra Bujumbura Moroni COMOROS SA ANGOLA Southern pe Pacif Cross ic Cable -2 (PPC -2) Auckland PENDING SUCCESSFUL ACQUISITION OF SWITCH AND DATA IN Q2 2010 ASIA-PACIFIC: Hong Kong Singapore Sydney Tokyo SYDNEY WACS SAT-3 ACE 2 is- et ant beN Glo AN -1 et SA C/L beN SAm Atl Montevideo Buenos Aires ARGENTINA Wellington NEW ZEALAND Map of Undersea Fiber Optic Cables. To request a printed copy, visit: http://www.equinix.com/requestmap. © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com Maseru LESOTHO URUGUAY Santiago Tasman Sea 4 Glo SWAZILAND Bloemfontein SOUTH AFRICA 2 N Optik or/Pi Canberra Melbourne EQUINIX EXPANSION EUROPE: Amsterdam Düsseldorf Frankfurt Geneva London Munich Paris Zürich Maputo Pretoria Argentina – Uruguay is- SPI Perth EQUINIX IBX METRO CENTERS NORTH AMERICA: Chicago Dallas Los Angeles New York Silicon Valley Washington DC BOTSWANA Johannesburg Mbabane ant ss MOZAMBIQUE Gaborone AN Cro Windhoek São Paulo Asunción Atl rn MALAWI Harare ZIMBABWE NAMIBIA Cape Town -1 the Rio de Janeiro PARAGUAY SA C/L nd CHILE -1 n Go Sou Gondwana-1 PIPE PPC-1 na Sucre N Brisbane wa Lilongwe Lusaka Brasilia La Paz BOLIVIA Map depicts in-service and planned international and U.S. domestic cables with a minimum capacity of 5 Gbps after full upgrades. Intra-European cables in the North and Baltic Seas are not depicted. In-service cables included have an announced Ready for Service (RFS) date by December 31, 2009. Planned systems are cables under construction or those that are scheduled to enter service by 2012. Map does not depict proposed cables that have not announced landings or configuration. Cable routes are stylized and do not reflect physical cable location. M INDIAN OCEAN SEYCHELLES FE BRAZIL TANZANIA ZAMBIA Planned system In-service system FRENCH POLYNESIA SAm-1 Australia-Japan Telstra Endeavour Sydney SPIN TONGA SAC/LA em e Syst ix Cabl 3 eWe- SeaM Matr Southern Cross Paddington Suva Noumea Southern Cross Australia-Japan RWANDA BURUNDI Lio US Brookvale Alexandria Nairobi Luanda Lima Samoa – American Samoa AMERICAN SAMOA FIJI E Mogadishu KENYA SAFE Antananarivo Lion MAURITIUS SEA COM RA VANUATU NEW CALEDONIA ge SEACO Dar es Salaam PERU FIBER-OPTIC SUBMARINE CABLE SYSTEMS Coral Sea AUSTRALIA Oxford Falls Kampala Kigali SAm SINGAPORE SAm-1 WESTERN SAMOA SeaMeWe-4 Matrix Cable System Brid Arabian Sea e-Asia Dodoma N SAC/LA n Pan America APCN-2 i2icn SeaMeWe-3 INDIAN OCEAN Europ Kinshasa SOLOMON ISLANDS Honaira Port Moresby Arafura Sea SU Tuas Dili EAST TIMOR FLAG ETHIOPIA UGANDA DEM. REP. OF CONGO CONGO Brazzaville PAPUA NEW GUINEA INDONESIA FALCO ay SOMALIA Addis Ababa CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC Yaounde Libreville GABON Matrix Cable System Jakarta JA Katong Singapore Asia-America Gateway APCN EAC–C2C EAC–C2C TIS MIC-1 Tata TGN–Tata Indicom Tata TGN–Intra Asia Gatew Bangui Malabo JAKABARE Changi e India N Djibouti CAMEROON EQUATORIAL GUINEA SAO TOME & PRINCIPE Gulf IMEW FLAG Europ DJIBOUTI Abuja Lome Porto Novo Transworld SeaMeWe-3 OMAN Aden-Djibouti NIGERIA BENIN Monrovia Cayenne SURINAME N’Djamena Ouagadougou SIERRA LEONE -II Georgetown Quito ECUADOR SUDAN Abu Dhabi Muscat U.A.E. YEMEN Sanaa Asmara Niamey BURKINA FASO GUINEA Conakry Freetown GUYANA Paramaribo Bogota COLOMBIA Bamako ERITREA Khartoum OM Panamá SA C/ be SENEGAL Banjul Bissau CHAD AC PANAMA Dakar GAMBIA 1 NIGER SE Glo TRINIDAD & TOBAGO m- Qatar-U.A.E. y San Jose SA QATAR Doha SS ST. LUCIA ST. VINCENT MALI EA GRENADA SAS-1 Nouakchott PAKISTAN FLAG FALCON Gulf Bridge BAHRAIN Riyadh SAUDI ARABIA On GUADELOUPE MARTINIQUE ba ARCOS KIRIBATI TUVALU EGYPT in –Cu Caracas APCN Kuwait-Iran Kuwait City Ma Ame ela n 2 Pan N ezu rica VIRGIN ISLANDS ANTIGUA DOMINICA AFGHANISTAN IRAN IRAQ JORDAN KUWAIT LIBYA TAJIKISTAN Kabul Baghdad Damascus Amman ISRAEL S t Ne be MA C /LA GCN is- HAWAII ss Cro rn eav our aii ss the End Haw n Cro oa– ther Tels tra Sam Sou eric an Sou lia- PIPE PPC-1 tra Aus Am SAC SAN JUAN Cros s hern Sout GUAM Glo C EAC-C2 HONG KONG -C2C EAC sia pe-A 2 Euro FLAG APCN- As ia We-3 ra C N– Int SeaMe C2 TG Ta ta EA C- C2C EAC- COSTA RICA LEBANON MENA Dushanbe Asgabat eWe-4 Managua Ven PUERTO RICO TURKMENISTAN Tehran Berytar MAURITANIA CAPE VERDE Tashkent Baku SYRIA Beirut SeaM NICARAGUA CADMOS UGARIT CYPRUS Cairo ALGERIA ATLANTIC OCEAN UZBEKISTAN Tbilisi Yerevan G Tegucigalpa GEORGIA ARMENIA AZERBAIJAN FO North Miami Beach MAC Maya-1 Columbus-III Americas-II DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Caribbean Sea HONDURAS EL SALVADOR us sia a MICRONESIA Hollywood GUATEMALA Guatemala San Salvador Caspian Sea -R TURKEY TE North Mediterranean Sea Tripoli or gia Ankara s d Se PALAU BRUNEI Bandar Seri Begawan MALAYSIA Japan-U.S. Boca Raton autilu WESTERN SAHARA ARCOS SMPR-1 SMPR-1 Antillas-1 Domingo Kingston Belmopan MALTA MedN Aral Sea Re 1 Makaha MIC-1 American Samoa-Hawaii TPC 5 Telstra Endeavour Asia-America Gateway SAm-1 GlobeNet BICS CFX-1 Fibralink HAITI Santo JAMAICA BELIZE Bahamas 2 Hannibal GO-1 LEV TUNISIA Americas-II GCN Black Sea Cable System Athens SAm-1 -1 BahamasHaiti Vero Beach L-2 Keawaula Southern Cross Miramar San Juan Isla Verde Ge S Caucasus BULGARIA GREECE PA ica Gateway Kahe Point or se Port-au-Prince t HANTRU- ah CUBA BSFOC Sofia Skopje MACEDONIA ALBANIA GWEN VMSCS Melita 1 Tunis MOROCCO Antillas-1 Ne GUAM Havana Cayman-Jamaica Bucharest SERBIA MONT. Podgorica Tirane FLAG Hawk IMEWE KELTRA-2 Algiers Rabat us-III be Asia-Amer THE BAHAMAS MIAMI Bahamas 2 Se OS e hor AL ARC Mexico City ica Gateway TPC 5 ay BICS Miami Gulf of Mexico PAC TPC 5 Asia-Amer s Offs Rome e-4 MeW Cable Med Gatew MEXICO Ame Honolulu Australia-Japan TPC 5 Tata TGN-Pacific PIPE PPC-1 pines PHILIPPINES Tampa . n-U.S Japa 5 TPC s Cros hern way Sout Gate rica Asia- .S. Australia-Japan Atla Glo Kuala Lumpur Dumai-Melaka Cable System Batam-Rengit Manila -Philip merica Japan-U China-U.S. Piti Madrid SPAIN Gibraltar Rostov Odessa ROMANIA Belgrade Sarajevo ITALY BARSAV Barcelona PORTUGAL Lisbon Columbus-III Chisinau HUNGARY Zagreb CROATIA KAZAKHSTAN MOLDOVA Budapest BOSNIA & HERZ. Monaco Marseille FA-1 Apollo AZORES UKRAINE SLOVAKIA Bratislava Vienna SLOVENIA Sea Asia-America Gateway Guam-Philippines Tumon Bay Honotua MALAYSIA SeaM SAFE Guam Asia-A a-1 .S. Tanguisson Point et a TIS e-Asi Europ 3 eWe- G AA CN FLAG Asia beN AP SRI LANKA Tata TGN–Intra -1 Phnom Penh SeaMeWe-4 Colombo ach ya CAMBODIA Tata TGN - Tata Indicom T -SL /Re Ma Bangkok MALDIVES AG /AC-2 Yellow AC-1 4 TAT-1 tlantic CZECH REP. Ljubljana Milan Kiev Prague Frankfurt LEICH. AUSTRIA SWITZ. Geneva Lyon Astana POLAND Düsseldorf Zurich FRANCE /AC-2 4 Columb BERMUDA Glo VIETNAM THAILAND i2icn Bharat Lanka Cable System 2 op 2C Lo ia C-C As EA rth No FL CN C5 Rangoon AP TP Bay of Bengal Chennai APCN- LAOS Vientiane Moscow BELARUS Warsaw GERMANY Munich tlantic TGN-A FA-1 Houston PAC ChinaTaiwan Taipei TAIWAN Macau Hanoi MYANMAR LATVIA LITHUANIA Berlin Amsterdam LUX. Paris Apollo ud BHUTAN Dhaka Copenhagen Hamburg NETH. BELGIUM Brussels tic tlantic Apollo MAC Thimphu BANGLADESH TGN-A FA-1 Atlanta Dallas Unity Japan-U Kathmandu Kolkata TAT-1 rm Phoenix China-U.S. -II cas eri se-1 Am hor 1 Sea mSA NEPAL INDIA Mumbai tic tlantic TGN-A AC-1 PC-1 China-U.S. Unity nia Atlan TGN-A FA-1 Los Angeles PC-1 Tata Yellow Be Hiroshima Shanghai EAC–C2C Tata Apollo Tata Washington DC nia Atlan ntic 1 Tata Philadelphia Pittsburgh Nashville ger en all a ud rm Be PACIFIC OCEAN Osaka ia Atla -14 Hiber Boston Buffalo Cleveland Indianapolis St. Louis Ch Nanjing FLAG NAL/Reach NAL Toronto Detroit Chicago Denver Silicon Valley ni Tong Fuk Tseung Kwan O KJCN UNITED STATES San Francisco mi SeaMeWe-3 Tata TGN-Intra Asia ern AC- Ge EAC–C2C Islamabad PAKISTAN TPE Chom Hom Kok Deep Water Bay PC-1 TPC 5 Japan-U.S. Trans-Pacific Express UNITED KINGDOM London Montreal China-U.S. China-U.S. JAPAN Riga DENMARK North Sea Minsk Dublin IRELAND Hiber Hib Ottawa Tata TGN-Pacific TPC 5 Japan-U.S. Seoul SOUTH KOREA FA-1 GlobeNet Quebec Southern Cross Tata TGN-Pacific TPE Sea of Japan Pyongyang Yellow Sea 1 Gemini-Bermuda Apollo TAT-14 Tuckerton RUSSIAN FEDERATION ESTONIA SHEFA-2 AC- Vilnius ant PC-1 NORTH KOREA APCN APCN-2 FLAG Europe-Asia Asia-America Gateway Lantau Island ntic Tata TGN-Atlantic Manasquan Portland Tata TGN-Pacific ia Atla Atl Tata TGN-Pacific ern Glasgow TAT HSCS Tata TGN–Pacific Russia–Japan Cable Network CHINA MAC Wall Township Seattle TPC 5 Emi AC-1 Long Beach Edmonton Calgary Vancouver Sapporo agu st SOUTHERN FLORIDA Ninomiya Beijing ira Ea Yellow/AC-2 Apollo Shirley Brookhaven Crab Meadow Beach SEAK FLAG Europe-Asia Bishkek Dh d Miura KYRGYZSTAN TAJIKISTAN WARF ite EAC–C2C Ulaanbaatar MONGOLIA Lanka Bell Un Sta r ite d We Or st eg on Un a– a APCN-2 China-U.S. Chikura New Delhi a sk PC-1 Japan-U.S. Australia-Japan CANADA sk rth Hib Greenland Connect Ala No CFX-1 TOKYO S EAC–C2C Maruyama KAZAKHSTAN AC FLAG NAL/Reach NAL Wada Ajigaura Astana sk NEW YORK Ala Ala Tallin Stockholm Bellport NEW JERSEY Sea of Okhostk St. Petersburg Hudson Bay Gulf of Alaska AM Kodiak Kenai Bering Sea TE RUSSIAN FEDERATION CAN MADAGASCAR RÉUNION Mumbai EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE Third, ISPs must have commercial agreements with each other to pass traffic, and physically connect backbones with each other to accomplish this. The locations where the backbones tie together, also known as peering points, are the bridge between carriers. Thus, a route between two computers connected to different carriers might not be the shortest possible route: data sent from a computer in Boston to a computer in Maine may go through a peering point in New York. The implications become even greater in Asia, where a PC in Singapore trying to reach Sydney may be routed through Los Angeles, transiting the Pacific Ocean twice. These types of routing inefficiencies can have devastating consequences on performance. Equinix’s data centers were built to act as the major peering points for ISPs, and our founding principle is to serve as a neutral location for carriers and their customers to meet and efficiently exchange traffic. Equinix is the only global provider of carrierneutral data center services. More than 600 carriers connect with each other in our facilities around the world, and the carrier connections to our facilities are their backbone links that expedite internet traffic. Equinix customers choose to build their infrastructure inside our data centers to ensure reliability and security, while connecting to the carriers they choose in order to leverage the world’s most reliable and efficient network routes. This allows businesses to mitigate the unpredictability of the internet by connecting directly to the ISPs their end users use most often, whether a large cable broadband provider in the U.S., a French ISP, or a wireless provider for smartphones. Because the physical speed limitations caused by geographical distances can also be a factor, Equinix has built data centers all around the world, enabling our customers to locate their infrastructure as close to their end users as possible. We call our combination of reliable data centers, located around the world, which contain dynamic ecosystems of customers and networks “Platform Equinix.” 6 TYPICAL ROUTE TO END USER HOPS 7 CUSTOMER HOPS 6 HOPS OPTIMAL ROUTE TO END USER CUSTOMER 3 HOPS A 4 B HOPS C 4 HOPS 5 © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE HOW DO WE TEST APPLICATION PERFORMANCE? In collaboration with Compuware/Gomez, Equinix created a dedicated test platform to quantify the application performance enabled by Platform Equinix. By building a “beacon server” connected to multiple carriers, Equinix simulated the effects of different application routing scenarios—connected to only one carrier or connected to a multitude of carriers—using the same hardware, software and physical location to remove as many variables as possible. In addition, to represent the impact of geographic diversity, Equinix replicated the beacon server at sites on the East Coast (Ashburn, Va.) and West Coast (Silicon Valley, Calif.). The beacon server was initially configured to represent a typical server deployment with a connection to a single ISP in one location. The configuration was then connected with up to five carriers across multiple sites. Gomez, the web performance division of Compuware, provides the industry’s leading solution for testing the performance, availability, and quality of web and mobile applications. The Gomez platform integrates web load testing, web performance management, web cross-browser testing, and web performance business analysis, enabling organizations to test from the “outside-in” across all users, browsers, devices, geographies, and data centers. Gomez has created a unique monitoring solution that aligns with our attempt at representing real performance across the internet. Its Active Last Mile capability provides on-demand active monitoring from more than 150,000 real, consumer-grade computers connected to over 2,500 local ISPs and wireless carriers in more than 168 countries around the globe. Gomez is the only solution able to provide an accurate view into the end user experience from anywhere on the internet, anywhere in the world, on any carrier. In addition, the Gomez platform is extensible and flexible enough for Equinix to capture standard data, such as end-to-end connection time and availability, and also create custom traceroute scripts to provide visibility into actual network paths taken, by performing scripted routines using their last-mile network. The resulting data was parsed by removing outlying data (the bottom and top 2.5% of results for all tests), sorted by region and statistically analyzed to calculate variance (which translates into predictability). Equinix tested three key parameters: roundtrip time, traceroute, and availability. Roundtrip time represents the time it takes to establish an initial connection to a server. This minimizes any differences in page rendering time, as well as any potential concerns about database or back-end access. Differentials in roundtrip times can then be isolated to correlate with network speed. The traceroute test counts how many network hops exist between the last-mile test node and the beacon servers. Finally, availability data was collected from all global locations, which factors in the reliability of the internet as a whole . The Gomez Network: World’s Largest and Most Comprehensive Performance Monitoring and Testing Network Source: http://www.gomez.com/ products-solutions/technology/thegomez-network/ Backbone Web Performance Management and Load Testing 150+ locations Gomez Last Mile Web Performance Management and Load Testing 150,000+ locations 6 © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com Virtual Test Bed Cross-Browser Testing 500+ browser/OS combo’s 5,000+ supported devices Your Actual User Real User Monitoring Worldwide, wherever your users are EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE RESULTS When compared to a typical deployment, roundtrip time, traceroutes, and availability were all materially better in the multi-carrier, multi-node solution. In addition, predictability was improved across all three factors. One Carrier ROUND TRIP TIME Roundtrip time was reduced 17% globally, in Asia-Pacific (APAC) by a striking 29% (65ms), Canada by 24% (25ms), Latin America (LATAM) by 14% (22ms), U.S. by 11% (11ms), and Europe Middle East/Africa (EMEA) by 7% (9ms).Using the modeling done in other research8, with a 20ms improvement representing a 7-15% drop in page load times, we can extrapolate the dramatic improvements in performance possible. Multicarrier APAC Total Canada EMEA Total Latma Total US Grand Total 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 Seconds One Carrier TRACEROUTES Traceroutes depict how many different routers a packet must traverse on its way to the final destination. A more direct route means fewer points in the path for congestion, failure, or variability. By leveraging direct access to multiple carriers in one Equinix facility, the number of hops to the beacon server is dramatically reduced. Globally network hops decreased by 24%, APAC decreased by 31%, EMEA by 27%, Canada by 21%, LATAM by 16%, and the U.S. by 7%. This translates into more direct connectivity from your end users to your servers. APAC Total Canada EMEA Total Latma Total US Grand Total 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 Network hops 8. http://www.belshe.com/2010/05/24/morebandwidth-doesnt-matter-much/ 7 © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com Multicarrier 14.0 16.0 18.0 EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE One Carrier AVAILABILITY Availability improvements achieved an 81% reduction in downtime globally, translating into a drop from 11 to two hours of downtime in a year. Typically, availability measurements simply show whether or not your site infrastructure is up and whether or not it is reachable from a single test node. By using Gomez’s Active Last Mile monitoring, we gain visibility into site availability from the end user’s perspective, factoring in whatever connectivity or availability issues their internet connection might be introducing. This provides a more holistic view of site availability. By deploying in our optimized fashion, downtime in Hong Kong went from 50 to 0 hours, in UAE from 120 to 0 hours, and in the U.S. from 13 to 0 hours. For end users, this represents the difference between failing to access your application and the assurance they can access them reliably every time. APAC Total Canada EMEA Total Latma Total US Grand Total 0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 Hours of downtime annually One Carrier PREDICTABILITY By taking the standard deviations from all the source data, we find 77% less variability in connection time, 28% less variability in traceroute hops, and 23% less variability in availability. Not only is performance improved across the board, but predictability of that performance is also increased dramatically. Multicarrier Multicarrier Standard Deviation End to End Standard Deviation of Traceroute Standard Deviation of Availability 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Standard deviation 8 © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com 3.0 3.5 4.0 EQUINIX WHITEPAPER OPTIMIZING INTERNET APPLICATION PERFORMANCE TAKEAWAYS How difficult is it to implement the architecture we tested? Amazingly simple. As this study clearly demonstrates, where you locate your infrastructure plays a huge role in how well your site or application performs. Without any software or server optimization, we were able to obtain significant improvements in performance by leveraging Equinix as a global interconnection hub. This represents a tremendous ROI compared to expensive software engineering efforts or infrastructure overhauls. By leveraging Platform Equinix, you can increase the performance of your site by 15-20% and increase availability and predictability without having to redo any software or hardware. As studies have shown, performance is critical to the end user experience. A recent survey by Equation Research showed many consumers will abandon a website or company application that performs slowly 9: ■■ ■■ ■■ Simply by colocating at the right data centers and being able to directly access multiple ISPs’ backbones, you can achieve the significant performance benefits that allow companies like Google or Microsoft to be fast for all users independent of their location. These performance improvements translate into measurable business benefits: ■■ Increased revenue for retailers ■■ More page views (and ad views) for content companies ■■ More satisfied customers for any type of site or application Whether your customers are regional or global, Equinix has data center services in the right locations to help you dramatically improve application performance to end users. Nearly one-third (32%) of consumers will start abandoning slow sites after one and five seconds. 39% of consumers say speed is more important than functionality for most websites, while only one in five ranked site functionality as more important. More than one-third (37%) of consumers said they would not return to a slow site, and 27 percent would likely jump to a competitor’s site. 9. http://www.gomez.com/wp-content/downloads/GomezWebSpeedSurvey.pdf TOKYO TORONTO CLEVELAND DETROIT SEATTLE PITTSBURGH CHICAGO DENVER SILICON VALLEY LOS ANGELES PHOENIX BOSTON AMSTERDAM PHILADELPHIA DUSSELDORF FRANKFURT PARIS MUNICH WASHINGTON, DC NASHVILLE ATLANTA HONG KONG LONDON NEW YORK INDIANAPOLIS ST. LOUIS DALLAS SHANGHAI BUFFALO SINGAPORE ZURICH GENEVA TAMPA MIAMI SYDNEY Equinix, Inc. (Nasdaq: EQIX) provides global data center services that ensure the vitality of the information-driven world. Global enterprises, content and financial companies, and more than 600 network service providers rely upon Equinix’s insight and expertise to protect and connect their most valued information assets. Equinix operates International Business Exchange™ (IBX®) and partner data centers across 35 metro areas in North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific. 9 WP-EN INTAPP 1F1 MB-CL 1012 © 2010-2011 Equinix, Inc. | www.equinix.com
