Decoding the Genome: Serious Infrastructure

Roland Piquepaille writes "The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is one of the largest genomics data centers in the world. In "The Hum and the Genome," the Scientist writes about the IT infrastructure needed to handle the avalanche of data that researchers have to analyze. With its 2,000 processors and its 300 terabytes of storage, the data center uses today about 0.75 megawatts (MW) of power at a cost of 140,000 per year (about $170K). But the data center will need more than a petabyte of storage within three years, and its yearly electricity bill will reach 500,000 (more than $600K) for about 1.4 MW, enough to power more than a thousand homes. The original article gets all the facts, but this summary contains all the essential numbers."

Comments

Who owns the results?

[Dancin_Santa]

The idea behind all this mapping is to find genetic sequences that can be used to mend ailing people. Using a computer to throw every single combination possible against the wall and seeing what sticks is certainly a way to go about this, but it also raises the spectre of a single large company owning all these combinations. This wouldn't be such a terrible thing if there was some sort of actual science involved, but by brute-forcing results, they are doing nothing more complicated than running a counting program with an infinite number of bits.

So each result is directly traceable to a number. Will these companies own these numbers? Can you even take out a patent on a number? In the DeCSS case, it was argued that the decoding algorithm was protected even though some implementations of it were nothing more than a carefully crafted prime number.

I don't like the idea of someone owning numbers any more than I think someone should be entitled to the fruits of their own work. This whole patent "creation/reward" system is getting turned on its head because of the power of computers. What would have been prohibitive even 10 or 15 years ago is possible (even easy) now. How can we keep our rights without sacrificing the progress of science and the arts?

Enough to power a thousand homes

[jurt1235]

Doing some quick math here: 2000 processors+1petabyte, divide by 1000=
2 processors + 1TB per house.
In processors: Way past it
In storage: Getting there (quick count of harddisks lying around= 750GB at least)

Since my energy bill is lower, even with the hardware running 24/7/365, are they buying their energy to expensive or what?

have they heard of the petabox?

[itsme]

http://www.archive.org/web/petabox.php

it uses only 60kW for 1 Peta byte

Math

[Alphanos]

Cost of 0.75 MW: ~$170K
$/MW: ~$227K

Cost of 1.4 MW: >$600K
$/MW: >$429K

Why the difference?

Re:Math

[Walkiry]

>Why the difference?

Presumably, the infrastructure to get 1.4 MW safely inside the same building and distribute it is more complcated and expensive than what two independent .75 MW would be. Things tend to go down in price when you buy in bulk, until you reach a point where the amount you're asking for is giving more trouble than what is usually dealt with.

Re:We can do either

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell that to the sickle cell.

Look, ever since humans decided that we are going to try to save any human life possible, natural selection ceased to exist. There are going to be all kinds of lovely little traits that will collect in our genome to our detriment. Now we can either decide to do one of two things:

#1. Select for those traits, also called eugenics. We tried that out before in the 1920's.

#2. Try to correct for those traits. It looks like we are going to try this out now.

Now if some poor sap with a degenerative genetic disease gets saved by genetic engineering, it does not give that person the *right* to bring a human being into this world with the chance of having the same disease. As far as I am concerned he/she would have been given a gift from society, and that entitles society to make sure that he does not reproduce. If you are going to play with the cell line sterilization should accompany it.