1 / 23

WP 17 progress report on service level management & users’ feedback

WP 17 progress report on service level management & users’ feedback. Reminder - Partnership. WP 17 Service definition and monitoring (coordination). Mercator Océan. Service quality monitoring. Commission forum. Product portfolio and SLA. Mercator Océan Starlab Brockman Consult

gerd
Download Presentation

WP 17 progress report on service level management & users’ feedback

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WP 17progress report on service level management & users’ feedback

  2. Reminder - Partnership WP 17 Service definition and monitoring (coordination) Mercator Océan Service quality monitoring Commission forum Product portfolio and SLA Mercator Océan Starlab Brockman Consult CMCC SMHI Mercator océan Starlab BC HRW

  3. Reminder - Partnership WP 17 Service definition and monitoring (coordination) Mercator Océan User workshop FTSS : service specification, product specification (EPST, IPST) + SLA Service quality monitoring Commission forum Product portfolio and SLA Mercator Océan Starlab Brockman Consult CMCC SMHI Mercator océan Starlab BC HRW

  4. Reminder –Objectives • Where we were • Service V0: 1 login/password for each product, downloading from MFC/TAC providers, catalogue V0 with information on products, SLA to download product • Objectives • Launch of service V1: have an integrated service for 2/3 of MFC/TAC providers, have an online catalogue with information + access to products, have a web portal with relevant information on products and service, start monitoring of service (SLA, OLA) • To ensure transition of service for existing users • To get feedback from users and propose evolution of service accordingly • Risks • To fell V1

  5. achievements • Evolution and update of catalogue December 2010 : V1 • 1 unique catalogue • 195 oceanographic products gathered in 68 product lines • from 13 different European production centres • online catalogue with web search tool for products • possibility of subsetting for some products • products can be downloaded from catalogue and from scripts • 3 teams involved (from WP17 and WP2) Since V1 launch (16 December) • Dealing with incidents (Seawifs), corrections of bugs And since February, preparation of V1 stream 2 catalogue (expected July)

  6. achievements • Registration process with updated SLA • Difficulty : use of 2 user database, that slows the process • New web portal with updated information • FAQ section • « new flash! » information –update information on incident, events … • Description of service, additional information on products • Update of user database • Monitoring of SLA information, of SLA commitments, start of transaction accounting • Feedback from users : UARs, user survey, user workshop

  7. Who are our users ?

  8. 287 SLAs signed • From 44 different countries • 210 EU users (~70%) • 77 non EU users • From 196 different organisations • 98 universities (50%) • 55 business companies (~30%) • 33 National Meteorological/oceanographic service (~20%) • 4 international organisations • 3 others

  9. How do they intend to use the products ? Done on 182 answers • Sciences/research : 131 (~70%) • Commercial use: 23 (~13%) • Public service : 19 (~10%) • Personal interest : 6 • Other : 3 • Are they end user or service provider ? Done on 140 answers • End user : 81 (~60%) • Provider : 36 (~25%) • End user & provider : 23 (~15%)

  10. Jean-Luc Nelias Navigator (Camas team) Groupama Preparing the next Volvo race One of our users

  11. Users asking from MFC/TAC products SLAs considered from beginnning of service (November 2009) A user takes on average of 3-4 products

  12. What is the behaviour of our users ?- example on users of global, Mediterranean and Arctic analysis&forecast products

  13. Users of global model products (1 product line) Done for January, February and March 2011 • Jan : 15 different users, Feb : 29, March : 30 • Jan-Feb : 9 identical users; Feb-March : 13 • 7 users are the same between January - February – March (most of them take real time data)  regular, operational users ? • For information: 129 SLA where users say they will take this product line

  14. Users of global model products (1 product line) What do the users take ? • Surface/surface layer OR surface to bottom • T, S, u, v, ssh OR only some variables • ice variables : 2 times Jan; 3 times Feb; 4 times March • Global zone : only surface / smaller area : surface to bottom (not so clear for March) • Subset areas : Atlantic North or part of it, gulfe of Mexico, gulfe of Guinee, SE Brasil + new March : Indonesia-Japan • User takes usually 1 area, sometimes several small ones  All users subset their products : either domain, variables or depth • Real time and long time series (can be 1 year). Tendency to have more real time • Per month and depending on users : 1 to 9300 requests • > 30 requests : Jan 4 users, Feb 11 users, March 9 users • 1/3 of users use scripts to download their products

  15. Users of global optimal analysis products (2 product lines) Done for January, February & March 2011 • Jan : 6 different users, Feb : 9, March : 9 • 2 are the same between January and February and 3 between Feb and March. 1 user lasts over the full period. They usually take time series • For information: 84 SLA where users say they will take these 2 product lines

  16. Users of global optimal analysis products (2 product lines) What do the users take ? • Surface/surface layer or surface to 1500 m • T, S, u, v, H. Feb : often u, v only • Global or global + Atlantic or Mediterranean areas • User takes most often 1 area  5 users in Jan, 6 users in Feb, all in March take a sub-domain from global Over the 3 months  time series most taken  The users do not come at once to take the whole products, but take a part of it and come back • 1 to 6 requests per user over 1 month  link to fact users take time series

  17. Users of MED physical products (1 product line) Biological product not considered here Done for January, February, March 2011 Part of full results as users have 2 different possible access to products V0 (ftp) and V1 (MIS gateway). And only few information for V0 • Jan : 9 users; Feb : 8; March 19 • Take either real time or forecast • When users access products using MIS-gateway : • Some users subset their domain • Take surface only or surface to bottom layers • Usually take all variables T, S, velocity, ssh still difficult to have some clear tendency, need longer analysis • For information: 77 SLA where users say they will take these 2 product lines (physical or biological)

  18. Users of ARC physical products (1 product line) Done for January, February, March 2011 Users have access to products either by ftp or opendap. Equivalent solution to MIS-gateway (over layer on opendap) expected to be installed in May • Jan : 12 users, 2 identified; Feb : 19 users, 4 identified; March : 23 users, 5 identified • For information: 34 SLA where users say they will take this product

  19. For March 2011 Sa-Su Sa-Su Sa-Su Sa-Su For GLO and MED (physical), internal users removed For ARC users all users considered Not considering weekend : average of 12 users per day

  20. User feedbackfrom survey 28 free comments (text written by users among the 60 users that reply to survey (~20% of registered users))ALL REGISTERED USERS

  21. What they like • A service « one stop shop » i.e. the integrated service with only one login/password, a unique catalogue “I don’t really like that some products are available only contacting MyOcean Service Desk”, a French user • The web portal to get access to products (70% of users who answered survey) • The possibility to subset products: download of a part of domain, of only some variables or of some depths (60% of users who answered survey) • To have support from MyOcean (service desk, technical team, scientific team) when facing difficulty “Thank you very much for the full and fast help! It seems to be working now perfectly. I confess I was not expecting such good support.” a Portuguese user

  22. What they don’t like • The navigation on web which is too complicated; difficulty to find the FAQ, the «news flash! » (5 comments about this) • The use of scripts (10 comments about this) “The perl/python scripts for extraction were extremely problematic to install. It required a full day of computer tech support to determine which packages were missing, install these, and test”, an American user Context : transition from service V0 to V1, and access to GLO products was only by V1 therefore regular users had to change from V0 to V1 access –and use scripts- on a hurry

  23. FutureChallenges Make a success of service V1.1 (July) and service V2 (Dec) • 2 updates of catalogue • Make evolution of service taking account on user feedback • Better ensure transition of service for existing users • Move users from V0 access to V1 integrated access to products This has been under estimated and is one of the main challenge for the remaining year • On going for SL-TAC • Planned for MED-MFC • Have a transaction accounting for all MFC and TAC and this information crossed with SLA statistics

More Related