www.georgejon.com Open in urlscan Pro
159.65.233.241  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

POST //marketing.georgejon.com/acton/forms/userSubmit.jsp

<form class="ao-form " id="ao-form-f17bba67-4cc5-4e81-83b7-a31e774be32d"
  style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; color: rgb(137, 138, 141); background-image: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: auto; background-position: center center;" method="POST"
  action="//marketing.georgejon.com/acton/forms/userSubmit.jsp" data-validate-blur="">
  <div class="ao-row" style="padding: 0px;" id="row-">
    <div class="ao-column ao-column-12 tablet-ao-column-1 mobile-ao-column-1" style="padding: 0px;" id="column-">
      <div class="ao-column-inner" style="background-color: transparent; padding: 0px; border-radius: 0px; border-color: inherit; border-style: inherit; border-width: 0px;">
        <div style="padding-bottom: 0px;" class="ao-block-wrapper">
          <div id="block-b1623970587693" class="ao-input-block ao-left">
            <label for="b1623970587693" class="ao-form-label">
            </label>
            <input id="b1623970587693" name="First Name" type="text" placeholder="First Name *" value="" data-type="text" tabindex="1" class="ao-form-field ao-left" data-error-message="required|Required field" data-validator="required">
            <span class="ao-form-error-message">&nbsp;</span>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div style="padding-bottom: 0px;" class="ao-block-wrapper">
          <div id="block-b1623970604635" class="ao-input-block ao-left">
            <label for="b1623970604635" class="ao-form-label">
            </label>
            <input id="b1623970604635" name="Last Name" type="text" placeholder="Last Name *" value="" data-type="text" tabindex="2" class="ao-form-field ao-left" data-error-message="required|Required field" data-validator="required">
            <span class="ao-form-error-message">&nbsp;</span>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div style="padding-bottom: 0px;" class="ao-block-wrapper">
          <div id="block-b1623970621925" class="ao-input-block ao-left">
            <label for="b1623970621925" class="ao-form-label">
            </label>
            <input id="b1623970621925" name="Company" type="text" placeholder="Company *" value="" data-type="text" tabindex="3" class="ao-form-field ao-left" data-error-message="required|Required field" data-validator="required">
            <span class="ao-form-error-message">&nbsp;</span>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div style="padding-bottom: 0px;" class="ao-block-wrapper">
          <div id="block-b1623971363025" class="ao-input-block ao-left">
            <label for="b1623971363025" class="ao-form-label">
            </label>
            <input id="b1623971363025" name="E-mail Address" type="text" placeholder="Email *" value="" data-type="text" tabindex="4" class="ao-form-field ao-left" data-error-message="required|Required field::email|Invalid email address"
              data-validator="required|email">
            <span class="ao-form-error-message">&nbsp;</span>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div style="" class="ao-block-wrapper">
          <div id="block-b1623970849231" class="ao-submit-block">
            <div style="text-align: center">
              <button type="submit" class="ao-form-submit"
                style="background-color: rgb(8, 154, 215); background-image: none; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: auto; background-position: center center; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-radius: 4px; display: inline-block; text-decoration: none; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: bold; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-style: normal; border-style: solid; border-color: transparent; border-width: 0px; padding: 10px 38px;"
                tabindex="5" onmouseover="this.style.backgroundColor = '#E87200'; this.style.color = '#ffffff'; this.style.borderColor = 'transparent';"
                onmouseout="this.style.backgroundColor = '#089AD7'; this.style.color = '#ffffff'; this.style.borderColor = 'transparent';">Sign Up For Insights</button>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </div>
  </div>
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_form_neg_cap" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_bot" id="ao_bot" value="nope">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_a" value="44180">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_f" value="f17bba67-4cc5-4e81-83b7-a31e774be32d">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_d" value="f17bba67-4cc5-4e81-83b7-a31e774be32d:d-0001">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_jstzo" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_refurl" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_target"
    value="https://www.georgejon.com/insights/double-ediscovery-performance/?utm_term=Double%20eDiscovery%20Performance&amp;utm_campaign=RE%3A%20Insights%20I%5Cu2019d%20Like%20To%20Share%20&amp;utm_content=email&amp;utm_source=Act-On+Software&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;cm_mmc=Act-On%20Software-_-email-_-RE%3A%20Insights%20I%5Cu2019d%20Like%20To%20Share%20-_-Double%20eDiscovery%20Performance">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_cuid" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_srcid" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_nc" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_pf" value="0">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_camp" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_campid" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_refemail" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_iframe" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_gatedpage" value="">
  <input type="hidden" name="ao_gatedasset" value="">
</form>

Text Content

Skip to content
 * Insights
 * Advisory
   * Strategic Roadmap
   * Environment Assessments
   * Architecture & Design
   * Workflow Optimization
 * eDiscovery Platforms
   * Hosted Platforms
   * On-Prem Platforms
 * On-Demand Services
   * Migrations
   * Installations
   * Upgrades
   * Staff Augmentation
 * 360 Manage
   * Core Management
   * Application Management
   * Database Management
   * Security Management
 * Security
   * Security Audits
   * InfoSec-as-a-Service
   * Password Protection
 * About
   * Leadership Team
   * History
   * Strategic Partners
 * News
 * Contact

Menu
 * Insights
 * Advisory
   * Strategic Roadmap
   * Environment Assessments
   * Architecture & Design
   * Workflow Optimization
 * eDiscovery Platforms
   * Hosted Platforms
   * On-Prem Platforms
 * On-Demand Services
   * Migrations
   * Installations
   * Upgrades
   * Staff Augmentation
 * 360 Manage
   * Core Management
   * Application Management
   * Database Management
   * Security Management
 * Security
   * Security Audits
   * InfoSec-as-a-Service
   * Password Protection
 * About
   * Leadership Team
   * History
   * Strategic Partners
 * News
 * Contact


Powered by Google Übersetzer


ENVIRONMENT PERFORMANCE TIPS


FIVE IDEAS TO DOUBLE THE PERFORMANCE OF YOUR EDISCOVERY ENVIRONMENT


HOW TO DO IT FOR LITTLE-TO-NO ADDITIONAL COST

BY STEVE LARSEN

As an eDiscovery consultant, I’ve managed and optimized hundreds of client
environments. I’ve been fortunate to work with some truly talented
technologists. After all these engagements, here’s what I’ve learned. The
pressure to perform in this industry is incredibly high. I see organizations
struggling with two core questions. First, how do we do more with less, given
that budgets and resources are limited? Second, how do we handle a large new
project that could overwhelm our existing capacities?

Both questions are about eDiscovery performance. Here’s the good news, as I see
it; in virtually every environment I’ve assessed, there have been opportunities
to dramatically increase performance for nominal additional costs. In this
article I’d like to share five ideas with you that could really help you do more
with less. In fact, it’s entirely possible that these ideas could double the
performance of your eDiscovery environment for zero additional dollars.


Who Is This Counsel For?

Law firms, eDiscovery service providers, major accounting and consulting firms,
government regulators and even corporations often own and manage eDiscovery
environments in-house. While there are substantial differences in their service
offerings and business models, all of these types of organizations want speed,
throughput and reliability from their environments. If what I’m about to
describe sounds like your organization, these ideas could be exactly what you’re
looking for:

 * Overall, you believe your eDiscovery environment should be able to perform
   much better than what you’re seeing today.
 * You’ve made a large capital investment in systems but have not yet realized
   the performance improvements you were hoping to see.
 * Your technology’s unpredictability causes you to struggle to accurately
   forecast the time required to complete and deliver against production
   deadlines.
 * Your organization historically struggles to hit hard deadlines and SLA
   thresholds.
 * You operate eDiscovery in-house and manage a high volume of client and
   in-house data.
 * You’ve experienced a system failure (outage) with detrimental financial,
   reputational, and human consequences.
 * You’re concerned about your capacity to handle a large new case.

Before we look at my five ideas, let me quickly describe what the word
performance means to me:

 * Speed. This is about systems running at optimal speed throughout the
   eDiscovery lifecycle, but particularly during Processing, Culling, Analytics,
   Review and Production.
 * Power. This is about the environment hitting periods of high-intensity
   workloads without being overwhelmed, slowing down, crashing and causing
   platform outages.
 * Scaling Capacity. This is about all systems, not just storage, easily
   handling peaks and valleys of workloads without being pushed to red-line
   status.
 * Reliability. This is about your confidence in the systems working day in and
   day out in a way that is consistent with your expectations.

If that sounds like your organization and what you’d like to achieve, I believe
these five ideas could really help:  

 1. Get clarity about your environment’s current state.
 2. Provision virtual machine resources based upon workload requirements.
 3. Understand agent activity on your machines.
 4. Avoid SQL resource starvation.
 5. Conduct capacity planning to enhance environment predictability.  

Let’s take a closer look at each of these ideas.

Get Clarity About Your Environment’s Current State Capabilities

The starting point for doubling performance is documenting current state. This
is a relatively straightforward exercise, yet one I see most organizations not
engaging in. Why do you need to do this?

 * You need baseline performance metrics to help you document your current
   capabilities so you can define and recognize “poor” performance.
 * You need documentation about all components within the system so you can
   easily spot obvious problems. There are several components within eDiscovery
   environments that could produce slow-downs, weak performance and outages. If
   you can compare actual performance, by way of log files and the like, with
   the manufacturer’s projected performance, you just might be able to narrow
   down the cause of your problems. This can expedite resolutions.
 * You want to be predictive about future-state performance so your efforts are
   focused. For example, if your current Processing performance yields 2.5
   Gigabytes (GB) per hour per worker but your expectation is to be at 5 GB per
   hour per worker, you know where to focus—enhancing Processing throughput.
 * If you can spot problem areas, you can engage in intelligent fixes that might
   not cost you anything. The default solution we see organizations leaning
   toward, when there are performance issues, is throw more hardware at their
   problems. In some instances, that’s necessary. But in many, many other
   instances, that won’t really solve your problem.

I recommend that you document performance in two areas: systems and throughput
(the actual amount of work you’re getting complete). For systems, I recommend
this type of analysis:

 * Physical Servers. How many servers do you have? How old are they? What are
   their specifications for CPU and RAM?
 * Storage. How many systems do you have? How old are they? How much unused
   capacity do you have today? What are their specifications? We often find that
   the types of storage organizations use can significantly impact cost and
   performance. We recommend a tiered architecture that would likely include
   high-speed (flash) systems and lower-speed systems, based on the tasks they
   need to handle.
 * Virtualization specifications. How many virtual machines are you running in
   total? How many are you running per physical server? How many physical CPUs
   are available versus allocated (virtual CPUs) on each host? Have you,
   perhaps, under-invested in the physical requirements necessary to support
   your virtual infrastructure?
 * SQL databases. How many SQL databases are in your environment today? How many
   SQL servers do you have to support them? Do you have the right balance
   between SQL Standard versus SQL Enterprise licenses? We often find that
   organizations do not engineer their SQL environment to support their actual
   work-flows.
 * eDiscovery application. What application portfolio is in use and how is it
   used in your workflow? How many licenses do you have? Which platform did you
   choose to go with? What are your current utilization trends? How does your
   actual performance compare to the application vendor’s benchmarks?
 * Network. Is your eDiscovery environment segregated from your general IT
   environment? I recommend that you document your network systems and design.
   There are many tools that will allow you to create network maps quickly and
   cost effectively. I recommend that you also document the technical
   specifications of key network devices, primarily switches and routers.
   Network configuration also can have a substantial impact on your security
   posture.

To document throughput, I recommend these types of analyses:

 * Average daily and weekly Reviewer productivity. What is the activity of your
   reviewers on a daily and weekly basis? How many concurrent reviewers will
   your environment support and do you see a degradation of performance when
   multiple reviewers are working simultaneously?
 * Processing speeds. How long does it take to process 100 GB of data? How many
   people are involved in the process? What datasets are you leveraging to
   capture this benchmark and does this align with the make-up of datasets your
   team receives for productions? We often see this benchmark being set against
   a completely different dataset type than Productions, rendering the benchmark
   irrelevant.
 * SQL database performance. How fast are your SQL databases today? How long
   does an average query take to produce a response? What is the average time to
   load workspaces? Is your storage performing fast enough to allow the
   application to be highly responsive?
 * CPU availability and utilization. How taxed are the CPUs in your servers and
   review platform computer systems? Are you currently over-committing your CPU
   resources (allocating more CPU to machines on the server than the server
   itself has available)? Does the hypervisor ever prevent tasks from being
   scheduled simply because system resources are unavailable?
 * RAM availability and utilization. How much RAM does your environment have
   today? Do you have enough RAM to support your environment? We often find that
   is not the case. Is your memory properly allocated to memory-hungry tasks and
   processes? Are you currently over-committing your RAM resources (allocating
   more RAM to machines on the server than the server itself has available)?
 * Size of largest matter. What is the size of the largest matter you’ve been
   able to handle, as measured by the document table size? Is it 1TB, 500GB,
   something else? How did it go handling this large matter and what lessons did
   you learn?
 * Average matter count. How many matters can you reasonably handle today? Are
   constraints from people, process, or technology? I recommend that you review
   average matter count by week, month and year. This will help you understand
   your current capacities today.
 * Storage Utilization. What is your data footprint growth rate? When must you
   expand storage, or remove data from production to maintain healthy capacity?
   Are the most active matters sitting in the appropriate tier of storage?
 * Storage Capacity Management. How long are inactive cases residing on your
   production storage? What are your data governance SLAs? Are your archive and
   restoration times for cases in “cold or nearline” storage in compliance with
   your contractual obligations?

This first step is essential to establish an accurate picture of your
environment’s current state. This analysis will be helpful in targeting areas to
address to improve performance. It will also help you take full advantage of the
other points of counsel in this article.



KEY TAKE AWAY
Most organizations that I’ve analyzed don’t need more equipment. They need a
better approach to using the equipment they already own.


Provision Virtual Machine Resources Based Upon Workload Requirements

If you want to double the performance of your current eDiscovery environment for
little to no cost, I recommend that you pay close attention to your virtual
machines (VMs). These are software-based servers that emulate the performance of
an actual physical server. Why do I recommend this?

When a client tells me that their environment is experiencing sluggish
performance and suboptimal speeds, I first examine the utilization rate and
resource footprint of their VMs. The findings rarely surprise me. In my
experience, 90% of eDiscovery virtual machines are configured using a standard
IT practice called “over-committing the host.” This is the number one culprit
for poor performance at the virtualization layer of the platform. In many VM
configurations, over-commitment is the default setting out of the box. This is
problematic for two very important reasons:

 * VMs consume resources differently based upon their task, type, quantity and
   the evolving demands of practitioners.
 * VMs, when using default IT configurations, often compete and cannibalize
   resources, degrading eDiscovery platform performance.

If you’re cannibalizing your resources, you essentially have two options today:
scale out or scale up. In the scale up approach, you secure additional resources
for your underlying hosts. This is about deploying fewer, yet more powerful,
machines. 

In the scale out approach, our recommended approach, you deploy more physical
machines with fewer resources per machine. This allows each machine to handle a
finite work-load. We find that this produces overall better performance because
no one physical machine is being over-tasked. This allows for more effective
load balancing across the eDiscovery environment. Clients who’ve done this have
experienced up to a 100% uptick in compute efficiency. Moreover, the heightened
performance is immediate and lasting. So how does this work?

VMs consume the resources of an actual physical server, particularly CPUs and
RAM, based on their allocation. But not all VM functions require the same
allocation and so do not need to be consuming resources at the same level. For
example, if you have a VM involved in Processing, it will require substantially
higher allocation of the physical server’s resources than say, a typical agent
server (please note that some agents or processes require just as many or more
resources as Processing). But if other VMs on that same physical machine are
configured to consume the same number of resources as the VM that is Processing,
it just might under-perform.  

The problem with the default settings in VMs is that they then consume resources
as if they were involved in heavy-compute tasks—even if they are not. If you
have 10 VMs on one physical server and all 10 VMs are configured as if they are
doing heavy work, they will try to pull more compute power than the physical
server has available. That will produce sluggish overall performance, and
unpredictable behavior as random VMs win the battle for resources.

Understand Agent Activity

If you want to substantially increase performance without buying a bunch of new
technology, I recommend that you closely analyze your use of agents. These are
features or functions that sit in the middleware of most eDiscovery
applications. Agents deliver a lot of benefits and can handle thousands of
different tasks within a work-flow.

In our experience, two agents in particular can really degrade performance if
they are not properly configured: Search and Conversion (near-native rendering).
They’re powerful, but they also can consume a lot of precious and limited
resources. When they are on the same Virtual Machine and launch at the same
time, the results can be disastrous.

My recommendation is that you DO NOT pair any of these agents on the same VM. In
fact, I recommend that you balance all of the agents for your primary eDiscovery
application across numerous VMs to ensure the most efficient operation. There
are two reasons I say this:

 1. Similar to the way Virtual Machines compete for physical resources, these
    agents attempt to consume ALL available virtual resources and this
    undermines the performance of one or both agents. This means that, right in
    the middle of an important review, neither agent will function properly.
 2. The likelihood of machine or complete system failure increases exponentially
    when agents are not balanced appropriately across multiple machines. This
    seems to happen right in the middle of an active and heavy review.

Fortunately, there’s a simple solution to completely avoid these detrimental
consequences. Move your Conversion and Search agents to their own dedicated VMs.
This segregation means that agents no longer compete for the same resources and
can be launched in tandem. Once you implement this configuration tweak, your
organization will likely realize immediate financial and operational gains.
Reviewers will increase the volume and speed of matter execution. Additionally,
you curb the likelihood of VM performance degradation and costly outages. 

Avoid SQL Resource Starvation

If you want to substantially increase performance without a lot of cost, I
recommend that you analyze the memory usage of your SQL databases. Why do I
recommend this? In nearly 99% of eDiscovery environment assessments I’ve
conducted, Random Access Memory (RAM) is improperly sized to meet eDiscovery SQL
database performance requirements. This phenomenon is colloquially called ‘SQL
Memory Starvation,’ and its implications are huge, especially for reviewer speed
and throughput capabilities.

In my experience, organizations typically have more CPU resources than required
to properly provision their SQL servers. However, they typically do not have
enough RAM. This leads to another problem as it relates to costs. Please allow
me to explain this.

In eDiscovery, SQL databases fly through millions of rows of data to return to
you the single data-point you are seeking. For SQL databases to do this, they
need a lot of IO throughput. Fast disk-storage alone will not address this and
neither will adding CPUs. In fact, adding CPUs could actually slow down the
overall performance.

Here is how this works, from a technical perspective. Search queries are
returned to reviewers based on the IO available to the system. When systems run
out of RAM to analyze the data-sets, they turn to hard-disks to process the
data. Hard disks are drastically slower than RAM. So if you want to really
improve performance, add more RAM. 

This actually solves a financial problem too. SQL server licensing, which is the
largest cost component, is based on allocated CPUs. We often find that
organizations are paying for SQL servers that are not being used to full
capacity simply because there is not enough RAM on the systems to optimize their
performance. So if you really want to improve your performance, acquire and
provision more RAM (which is often quite a bit cheaper than CPUs) and right-size
the number and type of SQL servers based on your actual needs. Once you’ve
conducted this resource rebalancing exercise, your organization could quite
possibly realize operational gains immediately. I’ve personally witnessed
increases in reviewer speed by 50%, 70%, or even up to 100%.

Conduct Capacity Planning to Enhance Environment Predictability

If you want to be ready to perform well on your next big case, I recommend that
you conduct a capacity planning exercise. This requires a data-driven analysis
of both your sales pipeline and your environment’s current capabilities. There
are three phases to capacity planning:

 1. Document your current-state capacities. In my first point in this article, I
    demonstrated how to do this.
 2. Document your historical matter performance. This is about understanding the
    ebbs and flows of matters being handled by your team. To do this, I
    recommend that you analyze, over the trailing 36 months, three primary
    factors:
    1. 1. How many matters did we handle, per month and per year, for the
          trailing three years?
       2. What trends can we see about growth in matter count and matter size?
          In other words, were you handling 10 matters per month with an average
          of 25 GBs per matter? Were you handling 100 matters per month with an
          average of 50 GBs per matter? What’s important here is to recognize
          trends because that can help you plan for the future, so you’re not
          caught off-guard. And, most importantly, how did those matters grow on
          average by GBs over the first 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of your team
          taking them on?
       3. How long did it take us, on average, to conduct a first pass to
          Production on each matter?
 3. Analyze the pipeline of what you can see today for new matters about to
    enter your environment. Add to this a reasonable projection of what you
    think might happen over the next 24-36 months.

All of this activity will help you understand what your actual capacities are
today and, therefore, what you would need to provision quickly should you exceed
those capacities—especially if a great big new matter were all of a sudden
introduced into your environment.

One of the biggest mistakes I see organizations make is to take on a matter that
they’re really not prepared to handle. This can lead to all sorts of negative
outcomes such as:

 * Overwhelming existing staff and technology resources.
 * Missing deadlines and all of the associated fall-out.
 * Negatively impacting existing matters that might be delayed so you can focus
   on the large matter.
 * Reputational harm with the client who brought you the large matter—especially
   if they are a long-term client that you want to retain.

You can avoid all of these outcomes with a capacity planning exercise. The
information gleaned from this analysis can provide an essential vantage point
from which your organization can proactively:

 * Construct departmental budgets based upon technology and business requirement
   forecasts.
 * Procure and provision hardware and software based upon budget and sales
   parameters.
 * Manage client expectations regarding SLAs, engagement scope and delivery
   timetables.
 * Build an emergency action plan to rapidly beef up resources when the new
   matter comes in. This will ensure you are putting your money toward the
   equipment that will most likely give you the performance you need now and in
   the future.

I recognize that capacity planning for eDiscovery environments isn’t an exact
science. However, in my opinion, any exercise that positions key stakeholders to
make informed decisions based upon resource alignment is a worthwhile endeavor.
I liken lesser alternatives to throwing darts at a dart board with a blindfold
on. Please don’t make this mistake.

How To Make This Actionable

This thought piece is a direct response to two very important questions for
stakeholders responsible for the eDiscovery function. First, how do we do more
with less, given that budgets and resources are limited? Second, how do handle a
large new project that could overwhelm our existing capacities? My
recommendations are that you:

 1. Get clarity about your environment’s current state.
 2. Provision virtual machine resources based upon workload requirements.
 3. Understand agent activity on your machines.
 4. Avoid SQL memory starvation.
 5. Conduct capacity planning to enhance environment predictability.

Organizations that have taken these steps have realized huge gains in
performance and staff productivity for little-to-no additional costs. Most
organizations that I’ve analyzed don’t need more equipment. They need a better
approach to using the equipment they already own. If you have any questions
about the points I’ve discussed here, please know my door is open.

About the Author


STEVE LARSEN

DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS STRATEGY & DELIVERY OPERATIONS, GEORGE JON

An experienced consultant and business leader, Steve develops and governs the
execution of George Jon’s strategic business and technology roadmaps. He is
responsible for overseeing global business operations for George Jon, including
advisory services, eDiscovery platform implementations, on-demand services
delivery, and oversight of GJ360 managed service offerings.

Steve has more than a decade of management consulting and project implementation
expertise, delivering timely and successful outcomes for VCs, small businesses,
and large financial institutions. His extensive professional experience includes
business development; key stakeholder management; strategy development and
execution; and operational process ideation, optimization, and implementation.

Steve holds an MBA in Strategy and Finance from Brigham Young University and a
BS in Accounting from Arizona State University.


About George Jon

George Jon (GJ) is an eDiscovery infrastructure, product and process specialist,
delivering performant, scalable, fault tolerant environments for users
worldwide. GJ works with global corporations, leading law firms, government
agencies, and independent resellers/hosting companies to quickly and
strategically implement large-scale eDiscovery platforms, troubleshoot and
perfect existing systems, and provide unprecedented 24/7 core services to ensure
optimal performance and uptime. 

George Jon’s (GJ) conclusions are informed by fifteen-plus years of conducting
enterprise-class eDiscovery platform assessments, application implementations
and infrastructure benchmark testing for a global client base. GJ has compiled
extensive quantitative and qualitative insights from the research and
implementation of these real-world environments, from single users to
multinational corporations, and is a leading authority on eDiscovery
infrastructure.

eDiscovery security questions? Let’s talk.

George Jon is the global leader in scalable, performant, and secure eDiscovery
platforms, processes, and services.
Your data never sleeps. You should.


GET IN TOUCH

566 W. Lake Street, Suite 300
Chicago, IL 60661
312-850-4320
Client Portal >


QUICK LINKS

 * Advisory Services
 * eDiscovery Platforms
 * On-Demand Services
 * 360 Core Platform Management
 * Security Services
 * Job Opportunities
 * Resources


GET INSIGHTS IN YOUR INBOX:

 
 
 
 
Sign Up For Insights


© GEORGE JON INC, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Terms of Use  •  Privacy & Cookie Policies
Linkedin Twitter
 * Insights
 * AdvisoryMenu Toggle
   * Strategic Roadmap
   * Environment Assessments
   * Architecture & Design
   * Workflow Optimization
 * eDiscovery PlatformsMenu Toggle
   * Hosted Platforms
   * On-Prem Platforms
 * On-Demand ServicesMenu Toggle
   * Migrations
   * Installations
   * Upgrades
   * Staff Augmentation
 * 360 ManageMenu Toggle
   * Core Management
   * Application Management
   * Database Management
   * Security Management
 * SecurityMenu Toggle
   * Security Audits
   * InfoSec-as-a-Service
   * Password Protection
 * AboutMenu Toggle
   * Leadership Team
   * History
   * Strategic Partners
 * News
 * Contact


 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 


Scroll to Top


ORIGINALTEXT


Bessere Übersetzung vorschlagen

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




By clicking “Accept” or closing this box you consent to our use of cookies. Find
out more >
I ACCEPT