OMG!!! The Service Quality Metrics!!!
Yesterday, Meta Linden posted the Service Quality Metrics of November 2007 in a post in the Official Linden Blog. Meta did an analysis of the data (not really self-critic), but i’d like to do mine. Of course, i’m not an expert in networked systems, just a customer of Linden Lab, but even being just this i think i can have my opinion (or maybe because i’m this, someone who pays Linden Lab).
Let’s see first some of this SQM graphs by Linden Lab:
First, i’d like to comment the Outage Graph, the first one.
Since the start of the Het-Grid project the planned outage is getting down (good thing) but the unplanned one is getting really high, specially in July, August and November. With unplanned time loss percentage arriving sometimes to almost 2% i think this Het-Grid is not working as good as it was supposed to work. It seems more than Linden Lab is replacing Planned for Unplanned outage. And this is BAD!
About the second graph, the Viewer Sessions Crashed one. As you can see the percentage of Viewer Session Crashed is… OMFG!!! from 21 to 24%!!!! so almost 1/4 of the started sessions crash!!!! (well, not far from reality, 1/4 of my sessions crash normally)
Is Second Life a Beta??? Well with this level of crashes it seems a Beta. I presume this graph talks about the “normal” viewer, not the First Look Windlight or the Havoc Beta one (is quite normal this other viewers crash, they are clearly beta releases).
Linden Lab is getting better on some things like communication with the residents (specially good communication about the “Quick Time Exploid” problem), but they need to work in stability and performance more, much more.
[...] Crimson seems to be surprised that the service quality metrics for SL look so bad, even though he admits that ¼ of all of his [...]
I did not need these metrics to know that I am always crashing.;)) As I wrote on my blog too, there is no single day that I can start and log off normally.
That is…what is normal by Linden Lab?;))
I’m not surprised at the unplanned downtime (in fact I’m surprised its as low as 2%) but the crashes surprised me. I hardly ever get any viewer crashes since I upgraded memory on my machine. I wonder if this just means that 24% of users are using a computer that isn’t actually powerful enough to handle SL properly? I think theres a massive difference between LL’s stated minimum specs are, and what actually works.
I think is important to know that graphs. For a moment i thought that was a problem of my system, but now i see is quite general. As Karl says, the specs by LL are surely “undertaken”, not only the minimum, my system is over the standard specs and crashes often.
Ooooh!!! You have music!!!!
He he he, yeah, just added it. Like it?
Yes, I love it!! Though it made me jump the first time LOL