Networking strategies that improve cloud performance


In real estate, there’s a mantra that most agents use of “location, location, location,” meaning houses that may be equal in many ways will cost more the closer you get to something of value. For example, the San Jose Mercury News recently published a story about a house in Sunnyvale, California, that sold for $782,000 over asking price. Why such a ridiculous amount? Because it’s near Apple’s new campus — location matters.

Does location matter with the cloud? Given how fast data travels, one might not think so, but location does indeed matter. A recent report from EdgeConneX and Cedexis, Cloud, Content, Connectivity and the Evolving Internet Edge, shows just how much it actually does. The study conducted uses Cedexis’ RUM-based internet performance measurement tools to test how cloud applications perform in different locations and with various optimization techniques.

+ Also on Network World: No-latency edge computing will snowball +

The first set of test results look at the impact of distance. A baseline response time was set measuring users in Silicon Valley connecting to a local Northern California cloud node and users in the North Virginia area connecting to cloud services in Ashburn, Virginia. Local response times were 24ms to Silicon Valley and 23ms to Ashburn. Then other sites were chosen in different parts of the country connecting to the closest node. The results confirmed the thesis that distance matters, as the response time for Southern California users was 37 percent slower (32ms), Washington State 66 percent slower (39ms) and Florida 109 percent slower (48ms).

Using content delivery networks to improve cloud performance

The report shows that one method of improving cloud performance is to use content delivery networks (CDNs), which effectively moves the content closer to the users. Cedexis compared the performance of localized CDNs in the EdgeConneX footprint to non-local ones in 31 different states, and the results showed that localized ones were significantly better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *