Servers Ahoy — Startup To Build Floating Data Centers

1sockchuck writes "Startup International Data Security says it is moving ahead with plans to build data centers on cargo ships docked in the San Francisco Bay. IDS first announced its plans in 2008, but they were postponed by the credit crunch. The company says it has now lined up funding and an anchor tenant for a proof-of-concept 'dataship' that will hold 500 racks of servers in its cargo holds. IDS isn't alone in contemplating ship-board server farms, as Google has applied for a patent for a 'water-based data center.'"

Comments

Now you can literally deep six unwelcome data

[Arimus]

Wonder if data sinks will have to be prohibited?

Re:Them scurvy dogs

[Beardo the Bearded]

Nah, they'll listen to Reason.

Well

[NetNed]

Does this mean that file sharing and sites like Wikileaks could just pull up anchor and go to the next country if being pressured by local law enforcement? Interesting the possibilities that this could have. Can think either bad or good, maybe even both.

Re:Well

[bsDaemon]

Thus increasing the ease of seizing their property under the guise of a Coast Guard inspection/quaranteen, firing on them at sea, sinking them and blaming it on pirates/terrorists, etc? Sounds like a good plan to me.

Re:Well

[BitZtream]

Not to mention that in reality it's far easier to just upload a backup copy of the site to a new server than it is to move a cargo ship.

Other than 'land is expensive' which is hard to believe since you can build a datacenter more or less anywhere on cheap land OUTSIDE of major cities... I just don't see any advantge at all, maybe some loopholes that haven't been caught yet but won't take long to close.

The whole thing seems really silly.

Re:Well

[DerekLyons]

Other than 'land is expensive' which is hard to believe since you can build a datacenter more or less anywhere on cheap land OUTSIDE of major cities...

Sure, land and buildings are expensive - but that expense is trivial compared to the cost of building and operating a ship. You're operating in a marine environment, and that means corrosion and a constant battle against it. That means algae and seaweed growing in your heat exchangers, or worse yet barnacles and clams/mussels/oysters taking up residence inside them. That means storms not only threaten you directly like they do a building, but they also strain your mooring lines and shore service connections (which will require routine maintenance). Etc... etc...
 
There's also tons of training, safety, insurance, and environmental regulations to contend with - and in most Western nations (I.E. those most likely to have the infrastructure you'll need to hook your ship to), the various regulatory bodies have no sympathy and no compunctions about shutting you down and/or seizing your vessel.
 
Not to mention that anyone who thinks land is expensive has never paid for mooring. Look at a map of any harbor and compare how much waterfront there is with how much land there is - waterfront is essentially one dimensional, while land is two dimensional. Worse yet, building new mooring is expensive. There's a whole raft load of environmental (much more so than on land) regulations on top of the zoning regulations.
 
This might work in an area with a lot of disused piers and infrastructure... But everywhere I'm familiar with in the US they're either already at capacity (and straining for more), or have repurposed this disused piers to new purposes. (Where they haven't demolished them outright either for new construction for new purposes or for habitat restoration.)

Re:Well

[mlts]

Circulating seawater has its bad points. There are a LOT of critters in that water, and in time, barnacles and other stuff will start forming in the pipes, essentially sealing them off once they get big enough and there are enough of them. Of course, one could filter the seawater or use a heat exchanger system, but that is added engineering effort and more items that can break down.

Marine engineering is a fight to itself. It already is tough keeping a datacenter on land operating... add the perils of the sea (water intrusion, corrosive salt spray, humidity, etc.) and it becomes actually a daunting task.

Re:Well

[IICV]

I just don't see any advantge at all, maybe some loopholes that haven't been caught yet but won't take long to close.

You've got a heatsink the size of the entire ocean sitting under your datacenter. I thought that was the main reason why they wanted to do this - run some radiators along the inside of your hull (or even poke them outside) and you've got all the cold you could ever use. Hell, if your systems are robust enough, you could even use filtered ocean water.

Re:Well

[chromeronin]

My bet is this could be for DR data centers to isolate them from possible land based disasters, fire, flood, earthquake etc. Tsunami coming, power up and head for deep water. Flood, well, its a ship and it floats! Virus/zombie pandemic, improved quarantine and isolation. I just want to know what they use for the data hookup - satellite links I would think would have far too much lag, and bee too slow for serving data, so unless these are just used to store backups and critical operations stuff, it is hard to see the advantages, especially as in the US at least you can still rent/buy old missile silos or fallout shelters to give you a nice stable environment for a server farm.

Re:Well

[TubeSteak]

You've got a heatsink the size of the entire ocean sitting under your datacenter. I thought that was the main reason why they wanted to do this - run some radiators along the inside of your hull (or even poke them outside) and you've got all the cold you could ever use.

In the USA (and many Western Countries) there are all kinds of environmental regulations on the discharge of heat into local waterways.

It's actually kind of a big deal.
Otherwise heavy industry would crank up the temperature and kill the native aquatic species.

A Patent?

[DarkKnightRadick]

Seriously? How is a server-farm in a ship innovative enough for a patent? Goodness.

Re:A Patent?

[ImNotAtWork]

One word: Cooling

Re:A Patent?

[gstoddart]

Seriously? How is a server-farm in a ship innovative enough for a patent? Goodness.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

You see so many patents that are like "a patent for doing something commonplace ... with a computer". Now I'm looking at "building a data center ... on a ship" and going WTF??

However, following the link to the Slashdot article, they're envisioning capturing the wave energy to run some of the power needs. So, that might be a somewhat novel idea that merits a patent.

Re:Them scurvy dogs

[Anonymous Coward]

You always do when you program in sea.

Old metaphor

[adolf]

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a cargo ship full of servers, hurling through the Pacific ocean...

Re:Old metaphor

[gstoddart]

hurling through the Pacific ocean

One typically tries not to use the word "hurl" in a nautical context. Maybe hurtling might be a better choice in this context? :-P

Heat sink

[snookerhog]

I assume one of the primary reasons for doing so is to take advantage of liquid cooling using the Bay.

how long do you think it will be before the thermal pollution watchdogs start cracking down?

Re:Them scurvy dogs

[countertrolling]

Loose Lisp sink ships

Re:Them scurvy dogs

[vlm]

You always do when you program in sea.

Great, now HR is going to require "20 years experience with sea, sea++, and also sea+" on all our resumes.

Moot because of tethering?

[thasmudyan]

They still need massive data and power lines coming from the grid, and because servers need to be connected to the internet without even the slightest interruption, a floating server rack cannot be mobile. In fact, special steps would have to be undertaken to make sure it stays in one place during storms and other maritime crises. Wouldn't it make more sense to just buy a piece of land near the sea and simply pump the ocean water around for cooling? Throw in a few photovoltaic cells and a wind turbine and you'd get a far cheaper, more reliable land-based data center.

Re:solid state

[Anonymous Coward]

i'm already carrying a terabyte around in my pocket.

Are you sure you're not just happy to see us?

Re:It says they're nearly impervious to disaster

[ImNotAtWork]

depends on how close to shore it is. It's nearly a non-event if the ship is not close to shore.

Re:It says they're nearly impervious to disaster

[MozeeToby]

Tsunami's don't work that way. Generally, the wave out at sea (or even in the harbor) is quite small, it is only when it pushes up against a shelf of land that it rises 30 or more feet above the surface of the sea. Besides, cargo ships are big, huge in fact. Even a 100 ft rouge wave (which would be completely unheard of in a harbor) would have trouble significantly damaging one of them. When was the last time that you heard about a cargo ship sinking while docked at harbor?.

Re:Them scurvy dogs

[llvllatrix]

I think the wire sharks will do more damage.

Re:It says they're nearly impervious to disaster

[DragonWriter]

But it sure seems like a tsunami would take it out.

In San Francisco Bay? While perhaps theoretically possible, I don't think a tsunami that would be likely to take out such a floating data center has occurred in recorded history, and given the geography of the region it would pretty hard (if it was in the ocean off the SF coast, it would be in more danger.)

Re:It says they're nearly impervious to disaster

[Alrescha]

"Even a 100 ft rouge wave (which would be completely unheard of in a harbor) would have trouble significantly damaging one of them."

It's the ones with eye shadow that you have to worry about.

A.

Re:Them scurvy dogs

[Tablizer]

Great, now HR is going to require "20 years experience with sea, sea++, and also sea+" on all our resumes.

Sea-sharp took down the Itanic.
   

Hmmm

[DaMattster]

This might be flamebait my personal opinion is that this idea is abject stupidity. I don't see any benefits as the ship still must be moored for ground power. I could see this being really good economically if you could anchor the ship in a place where you could harness waves for power. Perhaps, the only benefit is mobility - you could move the data center to where it is needed. However, with the urban blight resulting from the latest economic meltdown, why not grab up some of the abandoned buildings, rehabilitate them, and turn them into working datacenters thereby creating jobs for other industries and making America look better.

Re:Them scurvy dogs

[Beardo the Bearded]

Navies only defend the state against attacks against the state. It's not like in GTA when they'll call in the Army if the FBI can't capture you. Torpedos are fucking expensive. The odds are very high that it cost more than your house, and depending on where you live, more than your entire neighbourhood put together.

The reason you wouldn't be able to do this is a simple one of supply. Either you would have to keep getting food or you'd have to keep it unmanned.

If you want to eat, then you have to go ashore to a country that will either be a) ready to arrest you or b) ready to sell you out.

If there's a derelict ship in International waters that's full of computers and other expensive shit, I promise that some enterprising individual will make a field trip and just steal the fucking thing.

Your ship eats too -- that fuel isn't going to just magically fall from the sky.

You would also have to find a way to get Internet access to your ship. Are you using a satellite? A giant danlgy cable? Where is the feed going ashore?

As for getting away with crimes just because you're not at home, Canada has laws against "sex tourism" -- essentially, if you break Canadian law while overseas, you can go to jail for it. I'm sure that similar legislation exists in the US.