At Online and Scaleway we deliver robust and powerful servers. Our goal is to offer servers at the best price without compromise in quality and by providing an excellent user experience.
Three years ago, we started designing our own server internally in the Online labs. Everything from the PCB to the air flow is designed and created internally, to provide extremely affordable and high performance servers. The hardware is built in our factory localized in France, following a high quality process certified ISO 9001 and ISO 14001.
We've been recently alerted by one of our suppliers of an erratum concerning a component used in some of our servers (Dedibox SC 2016, Dedibox XC 2016, Dedibox XC 2015, Scaleway C2S, C2M, C2L, VC1S, VC1M, VC1L). This impacts the component by reducing its lifetime at an accelerated rate. As of now we're not seeing any occurrences for this erratum in our datacenters across 67855 servers deployed and potentially impacted.
From the information we get from our supplier, this component can fail under certain use cases and time constraints, causing the server to stop working and not able to boot anymore.
If the server hardware fails in any way, our users shouldn't be impacted too much as our value proposition consists in replacing all faulty hardware. We're taking this situation very seriously and are working with this supplier on a strategy to move forward in the most transparent way.
What is the source of this erratum?
Online stands by its manufacturing quality standard and customer advocacy for more than 17 years that contributes to the company's reputation. We'd like to be more open but this erratum is related to a component protected by NDAs, and whose communication is deliberately restricted by the manufacturer. We are not in a position to communicate as we would like. We apologize about that.
What are your solutions to address this issue?
Our electronics laboratory is currently evaluating the impact related to this erratum. We will do our best to maintain the level of service and keep our high quality requirements.
Did you already observe any occurrences for this erratum?
We have been running this component for 3 years and have a significant amount of servers in production using it. Our statistics, including the oldest servers, do not show significant rates of failure but we remain extremely vigilant.
As of today, we do not know if we will be impacted by this component erratum.