That was an extremely aggressive schedule. It appears that the computer hardware, software and telecommunications were coordinated to accommodate the the modular growth, I only wonder about the facility side of the equation. Typically, either the IT group drives or the Facility group drives. We normally attempt to get a marriage of the two so that as growth is needed in applications or computing power the infrastructure can also grow with the same modularity reducing the initial investment and the entire company wins.
|
Does Verizon's Voyager stack up to the iPhone? |
|
|
5 IT skills that won't boost your salary 
[1,407]
Women 4 times more likely than men to cough up personal info [589]
Japan's 10 funniest tech-related commercials [Videos] [407]
Throwing away a promo CD is "unauthorized distribution"? [1,265]
Adults too quick to dismiss educational video games [682]
Attack of the iPhone clones [Slideshow] [578]
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX [1,258]
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries [Slideshow] [409]
|
|
DC in six months
Though these folks appeared to get their project done in a cost-effective and timely manner, by no means can this experience be extrapolated or generalized that everyone else can do the same thing.
Very limited power and cooling as built, not too future proof
The article states..." A Liebert 100kVA UPS" ...
One rack with 4 10G IBM blade centers (14 servers x 4 blade centers or 56 Quad core CPU's with two physical cores per server) can use double this much peak power N+1, or 200 kva. From the power/cooling budget (unless there is a very slow projected growth rate of data and systems) this design may not be future proof or scalable from the power and cooling perspective beyond 2 years or so. What happens when systems go to 8 way cores for example?
pacthpanel
Fiber Optic Pacthpanels Features -- Technical information --
http://fiberoptic-cable.blogspot.com/2008/02/fiber-optic-patch-panel-19-rackmount.html
Post new comment