Slashdot Mirror


Ken Brill, the Man Who Defined the Data Center, Dies

dcblogs writes "The founder of the UpTime Institute, Kenneth G. Brill, 69, died Tuesday, the institute's parent company announced. Brill, an electrical engineer by training, is credited with playing an enormous role in shaping the modern data center industry. 'He singled-handedly crafted an industry out of nothing,' said Mike Manos, the chief technology officer at AOL, who had known Brill since the late 1990s. Until Brill's efforts, enterprises had been defining and measuring data centers in their own way, said Manos. 'There was no commonality.' Today, 'you can't go anywhere in the world without people talking about tier 1, tier 2, tier 3 data centers — it's that fundamental,' he said. In 2011, following Amazon's prolong outage, Brill warned that the perceived reliability of large cloud providers was going to lead to problems. 'There will always be an advocate for how it can be done cheaper, [but] if you haven't had a failure for five years — who is the advocate for reliability?' said Brill. 'My prediction is that in the years ahead, we will see more failures than we have been seeing, because people have forgotten what we had to do to get to where we are.'"

40 comments

  1. reliability by phantomfive · · Score: 2

    'My prediction is that in the years ahead, we will see more failures than we have been seeing, because people have forgotten what we had to do to get to where we are.'

    And considering the cloud isn't exactly known for reliability right now, yet another reason not to trust your data out there.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:reliability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but data recovery is only an foia request away.

    2. Re:reliability by hawguy · · Score: 2

      'My prediction is that in the years ahead, we will see more failures than we have been seeing, because people have forgotten what we had to do to get to where we are.'

      And considering the cloud isn't exactly known for reliability right now, yet another reason not to trust your data out there.

      Is any multi-region cloud provider less reliable than any single-site datacenter? There will always be unexpected disasters (or at least unplanned for, you may expect an asteroid to hit the planet every 50,000 years, but that doesn't mean that you've built the datacenter to survive it) and human error (like "oops, I wish I hadn't dropped my wrench into that panel, 480VAC makes a lot of sparks... it sure is dark in here now"), so it's not clear that cloud providers are siginificantly worse in that regard.

      Of course, when a business's primary data center goes down, few people hear about it, while when Amazon has a regional outage (or even in a single Availability Zone), everyone hears about it because it affects hundreds or thousands of companies.

    3. Re:reliability by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      If you are thinking of how to host your website, it might not be a problem. At that point, you have more control. If you are thinking of putting your own personal data on some black-box, that will always be worse than a known entity.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:reliability by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      but data recovery is only an foia request away.

      Request denied!

      -- Col. WIlhelm Klink, Information Officer, NSA.

    5. Re:reliability by pspahn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But is it only about reliability?

      Dealing, in the last week, with a 30 user Exchange outage (MB blew a capacitor, HDDs needed a restore) installed on-site, it made me realize why I originally chose to offsite the new domain's email instead of hosting it locally. The MS shop guys had a different plan and moved it all over to the Exchange server.

      So it's now been like three days while they wait for a MB replacement when there would have been nearly no downtime had we been on the service I originally set up.

      Reliability doesn't matter when you still have to wait a few days for parts (yes, this happens). Meanwhile you have some MS shop dictating things when a proper cloud service option is clearly the smarter deal.

      There's certainly something to be said for hosting locally (or at least keeping a copy), but for most businesses that don't want to deal with some random employee being "the IT guy", offloading this to some facility somewhere for $70/mo simply makes sense. You think Cathy the checkout girl (who took an IT class in college) wants to wake up at 2am to deal with a blown capacitor?

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    6. Re:reliability by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 2

      Outsourcing 30 users is likely the top end of a sweet-spot though. Once you hit 50, those initial economies/efficiencies go away, as you would want In-house redundancy, data discovery, proper archiving, etc., which add up to real money in a cloud solution. There are other break-points as you go up depending on organization needs.

    7. Re:reliability by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      The MS shop guys had a different plan.......So it's now been like three days while they wait

      They clearly didn't have much of a plan.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:reliability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the simple question is, why don't you have 2 Exchange servers? If e-mail is that important to the business, surely two servers is affordable. And Exchange makes it very, very easy to build a highly available system.

    9. Re:reliability by pspahn · · Score: 1

      why don't you have 2 Exchange servers?

      No, the simple question would be, why haven't we just migrated to Gmail?

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
  2. It would only be fitting ... by PPH · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... if he is laid to rest below a couple of raised floor panels.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:It would only be fitting ... by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      ... if he is laid to rest below a couple of raised floor panels.

      lowered into his grave by power cables.

      industrial HVAC to maintain constant temperature and humidity in the burial chamber

      And a couple LS-120's set about to log the event on tractor feed paper, right out of a box.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:It would only be fitting ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, isn't that just Lenin's Tomb?

  3. I thought Google defined the data-center. by ls671 · · Score: 1
    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    1. Re:I thought Google defined the data-center. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      off course, an article from stanford - googles alma mater :)

    2. Re:I thought Google defined the data-center. by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      I thought Google defined the data-center.

      http://infolab.stanford.edu/pub/voy/museum/pictures/display/0-4-Google.htm

      They just re-defined it. Don't forget, Google began with a ton of commodity PC motherboards stuck in racks.

      Now they have money, the redefined their needs.

      Meanwhile ... we started with a broom closet and still need to get the water sprinklers removed :(

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  4. people talk about "tier X" datacenters, but differ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    on what each tier means.

    This is a case where there are too many different standards, all using the same terms.

    In any case, administrative processes are going to affect uptime numbers far more than simple infrastructure redundancy

    remember that Google (who has some of the best uptime around) doesn't bother with dual power for it's servers, so it could not be more than a lowly tier 2 datacenter per some standards.

  5. He said he was Brill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did he say it or did you, and he picked up on it? Come on. Think.

  6. Re:Poll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It says on the page:

    "This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted"

    So it is clearly because "the discussion has been archived".

  7. Re:people talk about "tier X" datacenters, but dif by CyprusBlue113 · · Score: 4, Informative

    on what each tier means.

    This is a case where there are too many different standards, all using the same terms.

    In any case, administrative processes are going to affect uptime numbers far more than simple infrastructure redundancy

    remember that Google (who has some of the best uptime around) doesn't bother with dual power for it's servers, so it could not be more than a lowly tier 2 datacenter per some standards.

    The actual standards define availability redundancy and concurrency of systems, not of individual devices. When your systems are composed of multiple independent devices, it affects what is looked at accordingly.

    --
    a handful of selfish greedy people are no match for millions of selfish, greedy people -u4ya
  8. The man knows by Khyber · · Score: 0

    you're getting fooled via numerical proof

    quit talking shit about that which you know nothing about.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:The man knows by Khyber · · Score: 0

      To save face, none of you people know shit about what I'm talking about.

      Quit thinking you know shit, assholes.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  9. Re:Poll by JustOK · · Score: 1

    With 0 comments preserved for eternity

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  10. But isn't the data-center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a software defined data-center ?

    1. Re:But isn't the data-center by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 1

      No, it is a data-defined software center.

  11. Ken Brill, Died at 69 by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 1

    It's a good way to go.

    --
    Who did what now?
    1. Re:Ken Brill, Died at 69 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not according to Michael Douglas!

    2. Re:Ken Brill, Died at 69 by 2fuf · · Score: 1

      Not for his partner though, probably...

  12. I need to see a Gartner study... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I need to see a Gartner study...that TCOD (Total Cost of Death) seems a bit high.

  13. Cause by eclectro · · Score: 1

    From another article

    Ken Brill, founder of the Uptime Institute and a forward thinker in data center design and operations, died this week at the age of 68, the Institute said on Thursday. The cause was cancer, a spokesman said.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  14. Re:Which data center? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It means the general concept of a data center.

  15. True in many things... by CptNerd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    'My prediction is that in the years ahead, we will see more failures than we have been seeing, because people have forgotten what we had to do to get to where we are.'

    There are many aspects of our society and world for which this is true, not just data centers.

    --
    By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    1. Re:True in many things... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and it's only going to get worse!

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feeling_of_Power

  16. Re:people talk about "tier X" datacenters, but dif by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

    UpTime Institute got the tiers more standardized though; even some of the telecom companies have gone from Bellcore tiers to uptime tiers (1 most critical to 4 most critical). Ken and UpTime did a lot for the industry. They also did a lot to the industry. They tried to complicate the simplification in order to monetize it. Plenty of others are guilty of the same thing, but I do wish Uptime would go away as the standard-bearer.

  17. Re:people talk about "tier X" datacenters, but dif by Lennie · · Score: 1

    Their solution is the right software and no legacy applcations, a lot of existing applications are not 'cloud scale' or whatever you want to call it.

    So it won't automatically send the same request to an other machine and have it work.

    That is what is needed if you want to play 'in the cloud' properly. Only then will you get reliability and costsavings.

    All the other legacy applications people put 'in the cloud' will have less reliability in 'the cloud'.

    --
    New things are always on the horizon
  18. Again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First the apple guy, then the mouse dude, now this... who is next?

    The windows douchebag?

  19. Midnight Wake UP by unixcorn · · Score: 1

    'My prediction is that in the years ahead, we will see more failures than we have been seeing, because people have forgotten what we had to do to get to where we are.'

    As long as data center engineers are at risk of being woken up in the middle of the night, they won't forget how to make sure things stay running.

  20. I'm glad we can give credit for Military standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm curious as all of the datacenters I see today look a lot like the old ones I used to work in for the military during the cold war for telephones. They had a nuclear rating, emp pulse ratings, and multiple levels of redudancy. Why are we giving someone credit for telling AOL or some other company how to plug in a computer in there?