f01083939
Montréal, Quebec, CA
Sample Piece URL not found
193 TiB
Total Deal Size
11.73%
Deal Percentage
3.24% / 6.25 TiB
Duplication
262897
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Open
No
N/A
15.24 days
Client is receiving DataCap from single allocator.
Client was active in last 60 days or spent all its DataCap
The below table shows the distribution of storage providers that have stored data for this client.
Montréal, Quebec, CA
Sample Piece URL not found
193 TiB
Total Deal Size
11.73%
Deal Percentage
3.24% / 6.25 TiB
Duplication
262897
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Tung Chung, Islands, HK
Sample Piece URL not found
275 TiB
Total Deal Size
16.71%
Deal Percentage
31.83% / 87.53 TiB
Duplication
263025
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Singapore, Singapore, SG
Sample Piece URL not found
184.63 TiB
Total Deal Size
11.22%
Deal Percentage
49.86% / 92.06 TiB
Duplication
91077
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, HK
Sample Piece URL not found
25.63 TiB
Total Deal Size
1.56%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
60564
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Washington, District of Columbia, US
Sample Piece URL not found
44.94 TiB
Total Deal Size
2.73%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
60485
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Singapore, Singapore, SG
Sample Piece URL not found
93.63 TiB
Total Deal Size
5.69%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
48853
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Shenzhen, Guangdong, CN
Sample Piece URL not found
1.13 TiB
Total Deal Size
0.07%
Deal Percentage
50% / 576 GiB
Duplication
161045
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Tokyo, Tokyo, JP
Sample Piece URL not found
156.25 TiB
Total Deal Size
9.5%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
75026
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Tung Chung, Islands, HK
Sample Piece URL not found
156.25 TiB
Total Deal Size
9.5%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
74995
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Seoul, Seoul, KR
Sample Piece URL not found
53.13 TiB
Total Deal Size
3.23%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
75017
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Tung Chung, Islands, HK
Sample Piece URL not found
93.75 TiB
Total Deal Size
5.7%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
75455
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Los Angeles, California, US
Sample Piece URL not found
93.75 TiB
Total Deal Size
5.7%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
75297
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Sample Piece URL not found
180.53 TiB
Total Deal Size
10.97%
Deal Percentage
48.12% / 86.88 TiB
Duplication
129240
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
Piscataway, New Jersey, US
Sample Piece URL not found
93.66 TiB
Total Deal Size
5.69%
Deal Percentage
0% / 0 B
Duplication
92957
Total Claims
N/A
RPA
N/A
Consistent RPA
100%
Inconsistent RPA
N/A
Time to First Byte
N/A
Bandwidth
The below table shows how each many unique data are replicated across storage providers.
| Providers | Unique Data | Total Deals | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | 36.59 TiB | 253.63 TiB | 15.41% |
| 5 | 197.94 TiB | 1.1 PiB | 68.57% |
| 3 | 31.28 TiB | 181.41 TiB | 11.02% |
| 4 | 13.06 TiB | 62.94 TiB | 3.82% |
| 7 | 2.38 TiB | 19.06 TiB | 1.15% |
| 281.25 TiB Total |
The below table shows how many unique data are shared with other clients. Usually different applications owns different data and should not resolve to the same CID.
However, this could be possible if all below clients use same software to prepare for the exact same dataset or they belong to a series of LDN applications for the same dataset.
| Client | Total Deals Affected | Unique CIDs |
|---|---|---|
| No results. | ||