Slashdot Mirror


Cooler Servers or Cooler Rooms?

mstansberry writes "Analysts, experts and engineers rumble over which is more important in curbing server heat issues; cooler rooms or cooler servers. And who will be the first vendor to bring water back into the data center?"

42 of 409 comments (clear)

  1. Why not both? by tquinlan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unless you make things so cold as to prevent things from working properly, why not just do both?

    --
    DBA? Software Engineer? My company is hiring! Click
    1. Re:Why not both? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Cost.

      The question isn't whether it's good to keep both cool. The question is, which makes more financial sense? Cooling the whole room? Spending the money to purchase servers with a low heat-to-computation ratio?

      Probably a combination. But to say that people should equip every computer with VIA ultra-low-power chips _and_ freeze the server room is silly.

    2. Re:Why not both? by elgatozorbas · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The question isn't whether it's good to keep both cool. The question is, which makes more financial sense? Cooling the whole room? Spending the money to purchase servers with a low heat-to-computation ratio?

      In that case, I would say: cool the room. The room is forever (on this timescale), the servers maybe change every 5 years. Of course, start by NOT choosing the hottest server too, but I would invest in the room.
      Also I don't expect room cooling techniques to improve significantly in the next few years. Servers hopefully will.

    3. Re:Why not both? by Anonymous+Luddite · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >> I would say: cool the room.

      I think you're right. That's the way we do it, but - (there's always a but) some cabinets still get damn hot depending on what's in the rack. Sometimes you need to do spot cooling as well, or put in bigger fans to keep the equipment closer to ambient.

      I think starting with a cool room is the most cost effective way though - not to mention it makes work "O.K." in August...

    4. Re:Why not both? by FireFury03 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The question isn't whether it's good to keep both cool. The question is, which makes more financial sense? Cooling the whole room? Spending the money to purchase servers with a low heat-to-computation ratio?

      You don't need to cool the whole room - you could just cool the cabinets. Most cabinets have doors and sides, an open bottom and fans at the top. So you can blow cold air up the inside of the datacabinet (which is what most datacentres do anyway) and take the air from the top to recycle it with reasonably minimal air (and hence heat) exchange with the rest of the room.

    5. Re:Why not both? by Sylver+Dragon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wonder if a more directed cooling might work better. For instance, change the rack/chassis design such that it expects airflow to come from the top and exit the bottom, then duct the A/C right into the top of each rack. While you would still keep the rest of the room cool, it just seems to be wasteful to keep a several hundred square foot room at 60 degrees the whole time when the real goal is to keep the equipment in the racks from baking itself into oblivion.
      I also agree with the guy in the article, liquid cooling in the server room is going to happen eventually. I got to see the difference a simple watercooling system made on a P4 3.02GHz Extreme Edition chip, stuffed in the same case with a GeForceFX5950. Even with some serious fans the case was borderline overheating in games. Part of the problem being that the room it was in wasn't kept that cool, and the owner had it in a cabinet in his desk (it is what that cabinet was designed for). He dropped a liquid cooling system into it, and now the thing is always nice and frosty. And even with the jolts and jostling of taking the system to several LAN parties, the liquid cooling system is still leak free and rock solid. His experience has actually made me consider one for my own next system. For a server, where the system usually sits still long enough to collect a measureable amount of dust, water cooling may be a very good choice. If it's installed properly the likelyhood of leaks is low, and the performance can be very good. Heck, I can see it now, our server rooms will eventually have a rack or two devoted entirely to the radiators for the liquid cooling systems of servers, which run hot enough form plasma.

      --
      Necessity is the mother of invention.
      Laziness is the father.
  2. Aquafina... by vmcto · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will probably be the first vendor to bring water into the datacenter... I believe I've seen evidence in some datacenters already.

    1. Re:Aquafina... by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, since my last company had most of their servers in a data center room where we had two different floods, I'd say I have a pretty good idea which hosting company will be the first to bring water into the data center ...

      The first problem was snow that piled up outside, combined with clogged drains, that led to melting snow coming in through the wall where some pipes entered/exited. Since their layout was power in the floor and networking in the ladder racks, it's actually pretty amazing that a large portion of the power plugs and switches still worked, even while being submerged in 6 inches of water.

      So about a year after they had taken care of that issue, a water pipe for a bathroom on the floor above burst, and of course the water came down right in our room in the hosting center. It wasn't so bad until the flourescent lights in the ceiling filled up and started to over flow. We were able to limit the damage by throwing tarps over the tops of all the racks (there goes your cooling effect, though), but we still lost about 100K worth of server and switching equipment.

      So yeah, water in the data center? It's been done.

      --
      The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
  3. well I've always wondered this by Saven+Marek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've always wondered this. why have duplication of a function in a server across every single server box when it could all be done in the environment. For example all servers get electricity from the server room and all servers get network from the server room so why not all servers get cooling from 10F cooling in the server room.

    It makes sense!

    1. Re:well I've always wondered this by T-Ranger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What I have never understood is why servers virtually always have AC power supplies. Yes, you can get NEBS(?) compliant servers that take DC, but this isnt really a general option, but a distinct model line compleatly.

      UPSs take AC, turn it to DC, charge their batteries. A sepearate system takes DC from batteries, inverts it and sends out AC. (Good UPSs, anyway. Otherwise they are "battery backups", not uninteruptable) Computer power supplies take AC and distribute DC inside the case. WTF?

      Why doesn't APC start selling ATX power supplies? Directly swap out AC powersupplies, have them plug into the DC providing UPS and/or per-rack (or even per-room) powersupplies.

      Electrical codes are a BS excuse. Even if you needed verdor specific racks, a DC providing rack is, so far as the fire marshal should be concerned, just a very large blade enclosure, which are clearly acceptable.

      I cant beleive that Im the first one to ever come up with this idea. So there must be some problem with it.... Some EE want to explain why this wouldnt work?

    2. Re:well I've always wondered this by david.given · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Some EE want to explain why this wouldnt work?

      I'm not an EE, but it's something I've always wondered about. I don't have a datacentre, but I do have far too many computers: why does my machine room contain about fifteen wall warts, all producing slightly different DC voltages and plugged in to their various appliances via fifteen different non-standard connectors? Why not just have one low-voltage standard and have all these things plug into that?

      One possible reason is that (IIRC) power losses vary according to current, not voltage. By increasing the voltage, you can push the same amount of energy down a wire using a smaller current, which limits losses. This is why power lines use very high voltages.

      This means that if you produce regulated 5V at one side of your datacentre, by the time it's reached the other side it's not 5V any more. But it should be easy to get round this by producing 6V and having DC regulators; they're very small and extremely efficient these days.

      However, I suspect that the main reason why this kind of thing isn't done is inertia. There's so much infrastructure in place for dealing with high-voltage AC supplies that you wouldn't get off the ground using DC.

    3. Re:well I've always wondered this by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

      When you use DC power in a data center you run a high voltage (24V, 48V, depending on equipment) and then it's regulated down to all the usual voltages. However, it's a lot easier to transmit AC power over distances. It's not exceptionally lossy to convert AC to DC or vice versa any more.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:well I've always wondered this by windex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We use -48VDC, and it's a pain in the ass to find power supplies for modern hardware.

      Whenever we need something outside of normal ATX, we wind up paying custom development fees.

      No one makes DC to DC power supplies that are worth a damn, and the few vendors who do sell them (Sun, IBM, etc) charge an arm and a leg above and beyond what we pay to have them custom engineered.

    5. Re:well I've always wondered this by non-poster · · Score: 3, Funny
      What I have never understood is why servers virtually always have AC power supplies.

      I've wondered that, too. Every time the power is coverted between AC, DC, and the voltage level, there is some loss, so it's less efficient to do all of these conversions. I think having a UPS-oriented power supply would be a Good Thing, where you can hook up some external battery pack for the backup.


      At a previous job, we used some Unix machines that were completely fault tolerant, including backup processors, backup network cards, and backup power supplies with batteries. Yes, the enclosure had 2 power supplies, with batteries in the bottom of the enclosure. It was a monster. Then again, it cost $50k-$100k for a couple of hundred MHz, but it ran forever. Or until the software died.
    6. Re:well I've always wondered this by warpSpeed · · Score: 3, Insightful
      if your single AC to DC converter failed everything would go down

      Assuming that you only have one converter. The nice thing about AC to DC conversion is you can have multiple AC converters all feeding the same DC voltage to a single set of conductors to run the DC power out to the machines. The converters can even be out of phase. If the power conversion system is designed right, any one or two converters can fail, be disconnected from the power feed, and the remaining good converters will pick up the slack.

    7. Re:well I've always wondered this by Detritus · · Score: 4, Informative
      Due to the insane current and voltage regulation requirements of today's motherboards, the power supply for the CPU and associated chips has to be physically close and tightly integrated into the motherboard. You can't just pipe in regulated DC voltages from an external power supply directly to the chips on the motherboard. In your typical PC, the power supply (the metal box) provides bulk regulated DC power. Some stuff can run directly from the power supply. Components with demanding power requirements, like the CPU, are powered by dc-to-dc converters on the motherboard. These take DC power from the power supply, convert it to high-frequency AC, and back to regulated DC.

      The general rule is that stricter requirements for power supply performance can only be met by decreasing the physical distance between the power supply and the load. The trend towards lower supply voltages and higher currents makes the problem worse.

      AC power wiring is cheap and well understood. It doesn't require huge buss bars or custom components. It is the most economical way to distribute electrical energy.

      Once you reach the box level, you want to convert the AC to low-voltage DC. Confining the high-voltage AC to the power supply means that the rest of the box doesn't have to deal with the electrical safety issues associated with high-voltage AC. The wiring between the power supply and load is short enough to provide decent quality DC power at a reasonable cost. Those components that require higher quality power can use the DC power from the power supply as the energy source for local dc-to-dc converters.

      You could feed the box with -48 VDC like the telephone company does with its hardware. You would still end up with about the same amount of hardware inside the box to provide all of the regulated DC voltages needed to make it work. Cost would increase because of the lower production volumes associated with non-standard power supplies.

      In the end, it boils down to economics. DC power distribution costs more money and it doesn't meet the performance requirements of modern hardware. The days of racks full of relays, powered directly from battery banks, are long gone.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  4. Err, well, both? by Pants75 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The servers are the heat source and the cool room air it the cooling mechanism? Yes?

    So take your pick. To make the servers cooler, either buy new more efficient servers or buy a whacking great air con unit.

    Since the servers are the things that actually do the work, I'd just get feck off servers and a feck off air-con unit to keep it all happy!

    Everyones a winner!

  5. Cray still has water cooling! by green+pizza · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unlike most companies that are considering going back to water cooling, Cray has always used water cooling for their big iron. In fact, the only air cooled Crays are the lower end or smaller configured systems.

    All hail the Cray X1E !

    1. Re:Cray still has water cooling! by 1zenerdiode · · Score: 4, Informative

      I thought Cray's originally used Fluorinert(tm), which is definitely *not* water... *spark* *spark* *fizzle*

      All hail non-conductive fluorochemicals!

  6. Both by turtled · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I agree, both solutions would help. Our room is a nice cool 62.5. Best condtions to work in!

    Cooler rooms also keep others out... we get a lot of, its so cold, and they leave. That's golden =)

    --
    "I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father's protection." -- Sigmund Freud
  7. If you have cooler servers... by havaloc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...you won't need as much cooling in the room. Easy enough. This will save a ton of money in the long run, not to mention the environment and all that.

  8. inevitability breeds contempt by icebrrrg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Roger Schmidt, chief thermodynamics engineer at IBM, [recently] admitted that, while everyone knows servers are one day going to be water-cooled, no one wants to be first, believing that if their competitors still claim they are fine with air cooling, the guy who goes to water cooling will rapidly drop back in sales until others admit it is necessary."

    you know, some times the market actually rewards innovation. tough to believe, i know, and this isn't innovation, it's common sense, but mfg's are afraid of this? come on, people, the technocenti have been doing this for their home servers for a long, long time, let's bring it into the corporate world.

    --
    nothing worth possessing isn't possessed. or something.
  9. First thing.. by Anti+Frozt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That comes to mind is that it will probably be vastly cheaper to cool a rackmount specifically than to lower the ambient temperature of an entire room to the point that it has the same effect. However, I'm not entirely sure how well this scales to large server farms and multiple rackmounts.

    I think the best option would be to look at having the hardware produce less heat in the first place. This would definitely simplify the rumbling these engineers are engaged in.

    --
    In C++, friends can touch each others private parts.
  10. Re:uh, "rumble" by Master_T · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah man.... I got stuck in one of them cool room or cooling system "rumbles". They are hardcore. I lost a buddy in one those... pen wound. I still have a scar from when a Cool Roomer stabbed me with a ISA Modem.

  11. Water cooling, pah! by hazee · · Score: 5, Funny

    Water cooling? Pah! Why not take a leaf out of Seymour Cray's book - build a sodding great swimming pool, fill it with non-conductive freon, then just lob the whole computer in.

    Also has the added benefit that you can see at a glance which processors are working the hardest by looking to see which are producing the most bubbles.

    Wonder if you could introduce fish into the tank and make a feature of it? If you could find any freon-breathing fish, that is...

  12. Re:Outside air? by green+pizza · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe my ignorance is showing here, but does any installation use outside air for cooling? It seems that it would make sense in places that have cold winters (like here in the midwest).
    You'd need a lot of filtering and/or humidity control to make that a realistic option. Better yet to make use of outside air temperature. Which is exactly what your heatpump loop or your AC cooling tower is for.

  13. No way, not in my shop by doc_traig · · Score: 4, Funny


    The sign on the door clearly states, "No Food or Drink". Of course, shirts are still optional.

    --
    So long, michael. Don't let the door hit you...
  14. Re:Outside air? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We used to do exactly this in an ops building belonging to the company I worked for in 1997. The server room was cut off from the rest of the heating system in the building, with piped cold air from outside.

    It took 8 months until the first servers started dying from the intense corrosion & pitting on equipment closest to the air outlets. We were bringing in air that while it was ice cold, was unfiltered and brought pollution in from 2 storeys above street level, and I dare say more moisture than the air conditioned recycled worker-breathable air.

    Filters fixed the problem.

  15. Cooler servers... by Aphrika · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From experience of aircon failing/breaking.

    At least if a server fails it's one unit that'll either get hot or shutdown which means a high degree of business continuity.

    When your aircon goes down you're in a whole world or hurt. Ours went in a powercut, yet the servers stayed on because of the UPSes - hence the room temperature rose and the alarms went off. Nothing damaged, but it made us realise that it's important to have both, otherwise your redundancy and failover plans expand into the world of facilities and operations, rather than staying within the IT realm.

  16. Re:Water in the Data Center by C_Kode · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just once? I have a Slip and Slide between the racks!

  17. Save the globe: don't slashdot ! by AtariAmarok · · Score: 3, Funny
    "[sarcasm]But that would promote Global warming, the melting of the Polar Icecaps, the Greenland Glacier and other glaciers! [/sarcasm] Seriously, I can honestly see someone arguing that point."

    "Hey! Did you know that when you slashdotted that server near the Ross Ice Shelf, you caused 2 icebergs to calve? You insensitve clod!!!!"

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  18. Reminds me of an amusing anecdote by Raul654 · · Score: 5, Funny

    About 4 years ago, I was touring the US National Supercomputing Center in San Diego. One of the supercomputers had a clear plexiglass side where you could see inside, and it had running water and even a waterfall. Mind you, this 'water' was running directly over the electronic components. So the guy doing the tour said that it wasn't really water, but a chemical compound similiar to water, but very nonconductive. He tells us that it costs $10,000 per barrel, and that he always gets questions about what happens if you drink it. "Well, we're not sure what happens if you drink it, but we figure one of two things will happen. It could be toxic, and you drink it and die. Or, it could be nontoxic, and when our finicial guys found out you were drinking their $10,000-a-barrell water, they'll kill you."

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
  19. Hmmm... by biglig2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    PHB: Dear god, that server is actually red hot!

    SA: Yes, but notice that the room is lovely and cool.

    PHB: That's all right then. By the way, what's delaying that upgrade to Windows 2003?

    SA: Every time we put the CD in the drive it melts. We think it's going to be fixed in the next service pack.

    --
    ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
  20. Re:Ma Bell has been doing this for years by jhines · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Telecom equipment runs off -48VDC, and the phone company uses big batteries as their UPS.

    It exists, it just is expensive.

  21. Why not neither? Remove the power supplies. by mollog · · Score: 3, Interesting
    If they would redesign server racks so that the DC power for the motherboards was brought in from outside the server room, they could probably;

    Reduce power consumption

    Reduce heat in the server room

    Improve reliability

    --
    Best regards.
    1. Re:Why not neither? Remove the power supplies. by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Converting to DC can help a lot in big datacenters if you have a lot of hardware. UPS's run exclusively off DC. (remember, they're basically just chains of car batteries daisy-chained together) The datacenters lose power & generate heat in the conversion from AC to DC and back to AC. They're always happy to avoid that second step if possible. And if you happen to have hardware located in a datacenter where telcos have equipment you're likely to find a huge DC infrastructure already in place since a lot of telco equipment runs on DC.

      Personally I think BOTH the power & the cooling needs to be addressed. I've worked in datacenters where cabinets are filled with 30+ 1U servers. Not only is it a royal pain in the ass to deal with all the power cabling for 30 individual servers but the heat blowing out the back of those cabinets is enough to melt the polar ice caps...

      I've also worked on blade servers like IBM's BladeCenter. Their next generation of blades will require even more power than it currently does. Trying to convince a datacenter to run 4 208 volt feeds to handle just a pair of BladeCenters (28 blades) is like pulling teeth. They can't comprehend that much power in such a small footprint. A rack full of BladeCenters could easily require 8 208 volt feeds, whereas a rack full of 1U's may only need 3 or 4 110 volt feeds.

    2. Re:Why not neither? Remove the power supplies. by Critical+Facilities · · Score: 3, Insightful

      UPS's do not run exclusively off of DC. You are correct that they convert AC to DC, then route it through the battery strings, then invert it back to AC current. While this does generate some heat, it is NOTHING compared to the server racks. I've worked in datacenter environments for several years now, and I can say that one of the biggest foes to efficient cooling is poor space planning.

      I've never seen people so difficult to communicate with as hardware planning people. You would be amazed at how much better a computer room gets cooled when the computer equipment gets installed properly in a "hot aisle/cold aisle" configuration. Also, vendors and hardware folks don't like to have things pointed out that they're not doing, like making sure not to install a top discharge cabinet on the edge of a cold aisle right next to a front intake cabinet, or installing plenums inside the cabinets as some vendors recommend.

      A combination of good space/hardware planning as well as honesty and communication in determining potential heat loads are probably the 2 biggest factors in keeping a computer space cold, IMHO. No one's being helped by just guessing as what a rack full of SunFire servers is going to put out in terms of heat, find out from the manufacturer. And don't feel that your engineering staff is trying to tell you how to do your job or piss you off by letting you know that a rack you've installed is disrupting airflow. We're all in this together, remember?

  22. The A/C company brought our water by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Bob was changing backup tapes when something caught his eye at his feet. Looking through te holes in the cooling tile in the raised floor, something was moving, like a bundle of shiny snakes. Looking closer, we had 1/2" of water down there!

    We spent several hours with a tiny shop vac (we need a bigger one!) emptying the water and being thankful Bob had seen it before it got high enough to get into the power conduits.

    An A/C unit drain pan had a clogged drain, so the sump pump couldn't carry the water away. Whoever had the units installed had purchased water alarms, but *they had never been hooked up*. Now *that* was a brilliant move.

    We now have water alarms down there.

    Meanwhile, the room stays about 70 degrees, and the servers stay comfy, as do we. I like it that way,

  23. and that voltage loss = ? by SuperBanana · · Score: 3, Informative
    This means that if you produce regulated 5V at one side of your datacentre, by the time it's reached the other side it's not 5V any more. But it should be easy to get round this by producing 6V and having DC regulators; they're very small and extremely efficient these days.

    ...aaaaaand where do you think that energy goes?

    [DING] "Heat, Alex" "Correct, for $100."

    ...aaaaaand what do you think that energy loss thanks to high current means?

    [DING] "Efficiency less than a modern AC->DC power supply" "Correct, for $200."

    Anyone particpating in the "DC versus AC" discussion would do well to pick up a history book and read about Westinghouse and Edison. There's a reason we use A/C everywhere except for very short hauls. Modern switching power supplies are very efficient and still the best choice for this sort of stuff.

    1. Re:and that voltage loss = ? by cirisme · · Score: 3, Funny

      >>[DING] "Heat, Alex" "Correct, for $100."

      Incorrect, you didn't phrase your answer in the form of a question. :)

  24. Water-chilled Cabinets Already In Use for Blades by miller60 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Liebert and Sanmina have been selling blade server cabinets that use chilled water for at least three years. Vendors and data center operators have been wrestling with the heat loads generated by blade servers since 2001, and the dilemma of how to cool high-density "hot spots" has caused many tech companies to wait on buying blades to replace their larger servers. That's changing now, driven by the need to save costs with more efficient use of data center space.

    The industry has taken a two-pronged approach. Equipment vendors have been developing cabinets with built-in cooling, while design consultants try to reconfigure raised-floor data center space to circulate air more efficiently. The problem usually isn't cooling the air, but directing the cooled air through the cabinet properly.

    There was an excellent discussion of this problem last year at Data Center World in Las Vegas. As enterprises finally start to consolidate servers and adopt blade serves (which were overhyped for years), many are finding their data centers simply aren't designed to handle the "hot spots" created by cabinets chock full of blades. Facilities with lower ceilings are particularly difficult to reconfigure. The additional cooling demand usually means higher raised floors, which leaves less space to properly recirculate the air above the cabinets. Some data center engineers refer to this as "irreversibility" - data center design problems that can't be corrected in the physical space available. This was less of an issue a few years back, when there was tons of decent quality data center space available for a song from bankrupt telcos and colo companies. But companies who built their own data centers just before blades became the rage are finding this a problem.

  25. Cool the racks instead... by Otto · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Of the many server rooms I've been in, the most effective cooling I've seen has been to enclose the racks into sealed cabinets (adding a cheapish layer of physical security as well, by locking the things) and then piping cooled air directly into the top of the cabinets.

    If you buy your own racks to put gear in, then getting these things is easy, if you buy whole racks from a vendor with gear in it already (custom systems type of thing), then the thing comes in a cabinet which usually has some kind of a fan/vent arrangement on top. Rip that off, attach some ducting straight up to the ducts running across the rows, and voila, cool air flows straight down and out the bottom.

    All you need is to build your room with several ducts running across the ceiling, with removable plates every so often. The AC system pushes air into that, which then goes directly into the racks. You don't even need to cool the room really, since the air coming out of the racks gets cool enough to keep the room itself cool. The servers in the racks stay at fairly chilly temp in there. Only downside is when you need to open one, you're hit in the face with this freezing air pouring out of the rack. :)

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.