3 ms·
>I took a class on design for low PUE implementation and some comments from government data center technicians who said, in order to comply with the federally m
by sithadmin 10y ago
>I took a class on design for low PUE implementation and some comments from government data center technicians who said, in order to comply with the federally mandated PUE requirements, that people were leaving on or turning on zombie boxes to up their IT load.
AFAIK, the DCOI sets a target PUE of 1.5 or less, so running unnecessary workloads to meet the target PUE doesn't make much sense. I would bet there was some other kind of tomfoolery going on (hiding the fact that the DC overspent on efficiency when building out/upgrading the facility, or something along those lines).
- jdcarter 10y agoI took the parent's comment to mean: the datacenter had a relatively fixed amount of power going toward the infrastructure, so they'd turn on additional servers to add more power to the compute side of the ratio. They'd be wasting power but the ratio of power spent on servers to power spent on infrastructure would look better.
- brandmeyer 10y agoPower electronics losses (in watts loss per watts delivered) can be well-approximated as having a constant term + linear term + quadratic term. If the load is very low, then the power delivery equipment will still be spending its constant term losses, which may be large compared to the total actual load. But the PUE measurement system doesn't know how the various severs are spending power, just how much they are spending. So a busy wait, computing pi, dynamic language hash table lookups, or doing useful work all look the same.