01-14-2014 12:39 AM - edited 01-17-2014 12:47 AM
Maybe I am missing the point but is it better to ask.
One of our time based SLA shows following situation (same for all SLAs, this is only one of them):
Availability Month October:
Group Average: 99,956% - correct
Availability Month November:
Group Average: 99,760% - correct
Availability Month December:
Group Average: 100 - correct
Average Availability Quarter Oct-Dec (CI Summary/CI Status):
Group Average: 99,999% - seems to be correct but...
...how can we have an average availability for 1) of 100% if the 3 Months were. 99,967%, 100% and 100%?
Same for 2). How can be the average availability 99,998% if we have for each month 99,944%, 99,519% and 100% ?
Changing the calculation method to sample based, we have a value for the average quarter availability that is near to the truth:
Group Average: 99,908%
Here a screenshot (SLA V2 is Time Based - SLA-V3 is exactly the same but Sample Based).
Is there an explanation?
Thanks for the help!
Solved! Go to Solution.
01-14-2014 06:10 AM
I also see that you use custom Calendar, which can have impact on the calculation.
The 1st point to check is why 1 location gives 100% availability in time-based and 99.x% in the sample based. make sure both of your SLAs start at the same time and you recalculate them from the same time.
for more info, I suggest to open support case.
01-15-2014 07:52 AM
Thanks Asaf for your answer.
To check the start point and the recalculation point of the SLA was a good idea.
The V3 SLA (Sample Based) was a Clone but started not at the same time as the V2 SLA (Time Based).
What I did:
Cloned the V3 SLA (Sample Based) into V4 SLA (Time Based) with the same starting point and recalculate them.
So I had:
V2 SLA - Time based - old SLA
V3 SLA - Sample based - new sla starting from a later date
V4 SLA - Time based - new sla starting from the same date of V3
The monthly CI reports of V4 SLA displayed other values for the monthly availability then the V2 SLA. The quarter report of the time based V4 SLA was also correct.
Some hours before the clone and recalc., I installed the patch for BSM 9.23 and I do not know is this solved some SLA issues of BSM 9.22
All SLAs (V2, V3 and V4) had the same amount of samples (before and after the installation of the patch).
The final check was to recalculate the V2 SLA after the patch installation and it suddenly showed the same values of V4 SLA. So maybe the patch solved really some SLA issues of BSM 9.22
Thanks again and kind regards!