Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Computer Servers 'Stranded' in Space (bbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the out-of-the-world dept.

A pair of Hewlett Packard Enterprise servers sent up to the International Space Station in August 2017 as an experiment have still not come back to Earth, three months after their intended return. From a report: Together they make up the Spaceborne Computer, a Linux system that has supercomputer processing power. They were sent up to see how durable they would be in space with minimal specialist treatment. After 530 days, they are still working. Their return flight was postponed after a Russian rocket failed in October 2018. HPE senior content architect Adrian Kasbergen said they may return in June 2019 if there is space on a flight but "right now they haven't got a ticket." The company is working with Nasa to be "computer-ready" for the first manned Mars flight, estimated to take place in about 2030. The company is also working with Elon Musk's SpaceX.

89 comments

  1. I bet it says "Shipped with Amazon" by TigerPlish · · Score: 5, Funny

    Shoulda used UPS, not Amazon's own shipping.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    1. Re:I bet it says "Shipped with Amazon" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Curiously enough, the only thing that went through the mind of the server as it deorbited was Oh no, not again. Many people have speculated that if we knew exactly why the server had thought that we would know a lot more about the nature of the universe than we do now.

  2. Let the ISS keep them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let the ISS keep them. Come on, how expensive could these computers be? The cost to return them has to be way more than they are even worth.

    1. Re:Let the ISS keep them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Somebody probably wants to inspect the boards, chips and other components for radiation and mechanical damage.

    2. Re:Let the ISS keep them by crow · · Score: 2

      They probably want to study them to see if there has been any damage from radiation or other issues, but leaving them running longer may help them to find more useful information.

    3. Re:Let the ISS keep them by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      they need them back to do an tear-down

    4. Re:Let the ISS keep them by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      If they don't have BASIC in ROM then are they even worth returning to the earth? Let them become new satellites.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    5. Re:Let the ISS keep them by pjwhite · · Score: 2

      Running in low Earth orbit won't expose them to nearly as much radiation as they'll get in interplanetary space.

    6. Re:Let the ISS keep them by crow · · Score: 0

      True, but it's more than at home.

      Of course, I expect what they're really testing is the marketing advantages of having computers in space.

    7. Re:Let the ISS keep them by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      They probably want to study them to see if there has been any damage from radiation or other issues, but leaving them running longer may help them to find more useful information.

      That's just what they said about Spirit.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    8. Re:Let the ISS keep them by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      True, but it's more than at home.

      There are room-sized irradiation machines used to sterilize food.

      It should not be too hard to set up a test rig here on earth.

      Do SSDs use depleted boron-11 as a dopant? That is a cheap and obvious first step to making them rad-hard.

    9. Re:Let the ISS keep them by eneville · · Score: 1

      Didn't theFukushima and Chernobyl robots give up this information quite quickly?

      --
      Why UNIX?
    10. Re:Let the ISS keep them by hey! · · Score: 1

      The point isn't to have a supercomputer in space; it's to test the long term effects of space on modern computer hardware.

      The ISS's *built-in* computers run on a late 80s 80386SX processors, which were produced with 1000 nanometer semiconductor technology. The processors on this computer have minimum feature sizes of 45 nm or less, and are thus more likely to be radiation sensitive. The processors for these computers were taken right off the Intel assembly line with no special hardening.

      The effect of space operation is particularly of interest in specifying the mission computer for a manned Mars mission where the round-trip time precludes doing many things remotely.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    11. Re:Let the ISS keep them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or copy all the downloaded porn off it.

    12. Re:Let the ISS keep them by LordHighExecutioner · · Score: 1

      Probably ISS isn't the best place where to start practicing compulsive hoarding.

    13. Re:Let the ISS keep them by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      The effect of space operation is particularly of interest in specifying the mission computer for a manned Mars mission

      Except that in LEO, the computers are protected by the Earth's magnetic field. Sending COTS parts to Mars would be a bad idea, especially if the crew's life depends on it.

    14. Re:Let the ISS keep them by hey! · · Score: 2

      I don't think anyone is suggesting non-hardened COTS electronics is a good idea for a Mars mission.

      The radiation in LEO is not the same as beyond the van Allen belts, sure, but it's not the same as at the Earth's surface either.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    15. Re:Let the ISS keep them by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      The radiation in LEO is not the same as beyond the van Allen belts, sure, but it's not the same as at the Earth's surface either.

      People keep saying this... has slashdot been overrun by folks applying for bullshit research grants?

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    16. Re:Let the ISS keep them by hey! · · Score: 1

      https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zeme... among other sources.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    17. Re:Let the ISS keep them by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      non-hardened COTS electronics

      All COTS is non-hardened.

    18. Re: Let the ISS keep them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So pay one of the scientists a little extra for some side work?

  3. At least there not in the cloud. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cloud 2.0

  4. No hot swap?? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    redundancy power supply as well as some of the redundant solid-state drives.

    For an long mission they need to be hot swap or have say 4 PSU's that only needs one.
    For disks maybe an 3-4 disk raid 1 setup.
    Backup up disks
    FULL RESTORE IMAGES
    FULL LIST OF ROOT / ADMIN passwords maybe hard coded ones.
    BIOS RECOVERY DISK / USB.
    ETC

    1. Re:No hot swap?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      redundancy power supply as well as some of the redundant solid-state drives.

      For an long mission they need to be hot swap or have say 4 PSU's that only needs one.
      For disks maybe an 3-4 disk raid 1 setup.
      Backup up disks
      FULL RESTORE IMAGES
      FULL LIST OF ROOT / ADMIN passwords maybe hard coded ones.
      BIOS RECOVERY DISK / USB.
      ETC

      Uh, the article was essentially bitching about how specialized hardware being tested for ruggedness had not been returned on time, which is about as exciting as reading about a late library book, and tells you how much of a non-story we really have here.

      Your rant covers some hardware but mostly software DR planning, which essentially had little to do with a physical experiment.

    2. Re:No hot swap?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's some precedent for not having astronauts maintain the equipment. Way back in the mid 2000s there was a mission where the computer directed the Astronauts to replace the AE-35 unit on the high gain antenna. Long story short, there wasn't anything wrong with the AE-35 unit and the computer use the malfunction as a rouse, and murdered most of the crew. One crewman went missing and was never found.

      So since that happened NASA prefers that the computer have absolute minimum maintenance.

    3. Re:No hot swap?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you implying NASA is fictional also?

  5. Why recover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the purpose was to determine how durable they would be and they've been operational longer than intended already, what is the benefit to returning them to earth?

    1. Re:Why recover by gigne · · Score: 1

      "Well!", said the PHB, "the wings didn't fall off the plane on the first flight, let's not look any closer for stress fractures. Guys, make 10k more of these now"

      --
      Signature v3.0, now with 42% less memory usage.
  6. Empty Dragon by Zorro · · Score: 1

    SpaceX Dragon is going up there real soon with no crew.

    Belt it in to an empty seat and bring it back.

    1. Re:Empty Dragon by cdsparrow · · Score: 1

      This.

  7. teammasters want $2500/hour for space runs! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    teammasters want $2500/hour for space runs! and that is just the workers pay.

  8. British press by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nasa

    I can't understand the mentality of British print journalists...
    What makes it an initialism is the fact that the letters stand for something, not whether or not the letters can be read like a natural word.

    1. Re:British press by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw the same thing, wondered when it became "Nasa" instead of "NASA". Oh well, what do you expect from the Bbc?

    2. Re:British press by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      Is this a common practice in the Uk?

      --
      /* No Comment */
    3. Re:British press by gigne · · Score: 2

      nO. eVERYTHING iS fINE oVER hERE

      --
      Signature v3.0, now with 42% less memory usage.
    4. Re:British press by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Low-grade titty humor and men in drag

  9. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Space qualified hardware is not trivial. In the old days what was qualified would be one or likely two or more generations earlier than current which was a big deal when each generation typically brought significant performance improvements. Nowadays I assume it's more bulk. Still I'd think they'd leave the system up till it stopped working and then schedule to bring it back for analysis.

  10. And Skynet is born... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do I need to say more? Put on your tin foil hats people! The machines are coming.

  11. I've had HP loaners... by ripvlan · · Score: 1

    And they rarely call to get them back. Unless somebody else needed them....they were on permanent loan.

    1. Re:I've had HP loaners... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For pizza-box systems, that is true.
      Not so much for the larger, useful, systems, IME.

      OTOH, had a single project spend about $17M on HP in 1 yr, so perhaps I could have gotten a few rp84xx out of the deal. At the time, that was current HP-UX tech.

  12. What the fuck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The company is also working with Elon Musk's SpaceX.

    Who cares about these shit nuggets from the Musk shills?

  13. Re: I bet Putin meddled with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cohen says it's the President's fault though.

    And no, I didnt actually read the article. I just like to fook with you libtards.

  14. Strange experiment by Brett+Buck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am not sure what they are trying to prove with this experiment. The environment inside the space station is hardly any more daunting than sitting on a table in Cupertino. The real issue is when you get above the Van Allen belts and get a few zaps from solar flares.

    I am sure they know this, but, also, processors for the space environment are also a perfectly well-known quantity. Analysis alone should get them a very reliable answer on life time, upset rate, etc.

    1. Re:Strange experiment by afaiktoit · · Score: 1

      agree, they've been using store bought laptops up there since day one havent they?

    2. Re:Strange experiment by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Suppose there is a hull breach, and a loss of pressure. I wonder how all the electrolytic capacitors in the power supplies will deal with that. Will the electrolyte slowly boil away, or will the capacitors suddenly rupture.

      It's not only NASA that wants to know how these things perform.

    3. Re:Strange experiment by MobyDisk · · Score: 2

      Analysis alone...

      I would prefer that we do more than just analysis before building a $100 million device and sending it to Mars. The next logical step is to use the ISS that we have. If the result of the experiment is "What happened is exactly what we expected to happen" then great! It's the occasional "Oh no! It should have lasted years, but it lasted 2 days because we failed to consider *insert unexpected phenomenon here*"

    4. Re:Strange experiment by Brett+Buck · · Score: 2

      People have been doing that experiment, and validating it with flight data, since 1964. 1985, "we predict a double-bit memory error once every 28.5 days". Cut to 2018 - observed upset rate = 28.496 days.

      There essentially no question what space does to computers. And in any case, we still send things costing far, far more than $100 million into space (that is, *almost everything launched* is much more than that) and every one of them already has one or more computers in them, they follow the predictions plenty well enough to predict the results.

       

    5. Re:Strange experiment by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Running tests on the ISS isn't going to be very useful for when you want to go to Mars. Cosmic radiation gets much worse, and when a solar flare comes your way, there's no place to hide.

    6. Re:Strange experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus Moby, what's your problem? Just strap somebody in a rocket and send them! Safety and Cost-cutting are greatly over-rated. Being a pioneer and on the cutting edge is supposed to be dangerous. Wile E. Coyote would have died of starvation if he followed your direction..... ;-)

    7. Re:Strange experiment by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      I am sure they know this, but, also, processors for the space environment are also a perfectly well-known quantity.

      I would just hire the folks who made the Mars Rovers to build the space computer.

      Being how long they lasted, they seem to know what they are doing.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    8. Re:Strange experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you assume they didnt harden it with ceramic or film caps or other self-healing dry caps?

    9. Re:Strange experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      JEDEC memory scrub rate recommendations change already significantly within troposphere to reach some theoretical reliability number. The Mars mission needs locally accessible high performance computing capability, and this should be a first step to investigate the weaknesses in machines that are deployed rarely even at very high altitude environments due to increased costs of cooling and cosmic rays. Lowest bar and all that.

    10. Re:Strange experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, talk about missing the point!

      "They were sent up to see how durable they would be in space with minimal specialist treatment."

      They wanted to test COTS. They tested COTS. Being COTS, the cost of the test itself is minimal if you disregard lift costs. The test appears to have exceeded expectations opening the door to higher on-board computer power at much lower cost. You recommend the most expensive possible route instead.

      Facepalm!

    11. Re:Strange experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, this is very much NOT true.

      1. Radiation. Bigger chance of bit flips from cosmic radiation
      2. dealing with cooling and heat dissipation
      3. Effect of gravity or lack of it, long term on mechanical components.

      It would be interesting to do a controlled experiment from same dataload on components space vs earth.

    12. Re:Strange experiment by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Mars rovers have special rad-hard technology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Very expensive and rather slow compared to off-the-shelf computer stuff.

    13. Re:Strange experiment by religionofpeas · · Score: 2

      When there's a hull breach, the loss of capacitors is probably the least of their worries.

    14. Re:Strange experiment by lgw · · Score: 1

      IMO, it's the ride on the rocket that's the interesting test. Most electronic components deal very poorly with extended heavy vibration, even at 1g. (If you ever move cross-country, you'll find a lot of consumer electronics mysteriously stop working soon after the move.)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    15. Re:Strange experiment by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      When there's a hull breach, the loss of capacitors is probably the least of their worries.

      During a hull breach, yes, assuming the loss of capacitors isn't happening in a form that's adding to the ongoing disaster. After a hull breach has been dealt with, I think any survivors will be quite interested in having all systems critical to survival working...

    16. Re:Strange experiment by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      That's not how engineering works. You don't run only in the target environment. Suppose you need to design a computer to run for 5 minutes at 200 degrees C. The engineers would not simply test it for 5 minutes at 200 degrees C. They would run "characterization testing" which means they test it at 100, and 150, and 250. They run it in high humidity and low humidity. They run it at 150 for 5 minutes, then 200 until it dies, to see if running at the lower temperature reduced the longevity. The run it at 200 for 3 minutes, then again at 200 for another 3 minutes, and again, to see if cooling between runs is better or worse. They look at the damage to the product in between. This results in data - which results in predictions - which results in designs.

      The tests on the ISS might be very useful. Don't dismiss them merely because they aren't the 100% real environment.

    17. Re:Strange experiment by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      we predict a double-bit memory error once every 28.5 days". Cut to 2018 - observed upset rate = 28.496 days.

      That's GREAT! We ran an experiment that validated our predictions! DO NOT attack studies that aim to test predictions or reproduce existing results. That's the bread-and-butter of science. We have a big problem in science today with funding not going to reproducibility studies. It's more exciting to fund new research, but yet we constantly see headlines about studies not being reproducible.

      There essentially no question what space does to computers.

      As a consumer of science news, you might think this is well understood and boring and should not be done. But the engineers making such a device probably have lots of questions. For some examples: What was the error rate the same for the first 10 days as it was for the last 10 days? If not, what was the rate of increase over time? Was it linear, polynomial, or exponential? What is the effect of different types of cases? Different die sizes? Are 3D dies more or less susceptable than 2D dies? How was the error rate correlated with solar activity (linear, polynomial exponential, uncorrelated)? What kinds of flash are more susceptible to errors? What is the impact of changing read times, refresh rates, bandwidths, feature sizes, ...? How much does ECC memory help? Are there new ECC algorithms that might be better?

      All of these kinds of questions are useful for building devices that can survive in deep space. Just because you don't know the data gathered from the experiment does not mean it isn't valuable.

  15. Repurposed by Hydrian · · Score: 1

    How much you want to bet those machine got re-purposed as miners or the porn stash?

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished.
    1. Re:Repurposed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About as much as I would bet on you getting laid - zero.

    2. Re:Repurposed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm maybe NASA can "self-fund" by sending up servers and using the free power to turn them into Miners ...

    3. Re:Repurposed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking HP might want to check eBay Russia.

  16. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's a strange thing that under Trump, the tolerant left has decided that gay jokes are acceptable.

    Remind me... who are the real racists/sexists/homophobes again?

  17. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These days is less bulk and more power savings. G7 Proliant idle was about 300 watts, G10 idle is about 90.

  18. 2017 by Gabest · · Score: 1

    Probably some old and now obsolete Xeons, not worth recovering, just throw them out.

    1. Re:2017 by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      Why not do a little more testing? A true test of durability would be to see how well they work after re-entry.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    2. Re:2017 by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      If your server purchases only have a useful life of two years, you're doing it wrong.

    3. Re:2017 by xous · · Score: 1

      The point is to recover the hardware so they can analyze it to see what failed and why.

  19. It's the cloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the cloud, in the cloud!

  20. I think they're stuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In an infinite loop...

    Or have they suffered a hang-up?

  21. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by lgw · · Score: 1

    Space qualified hardware is not trivial. In the old days what was qualified would be one or likely two or more generations earlier than current which was a big deal when each generation typically brought significant performance improvements. Nowadays I assume it's more bulk. Still I'd think they'd leave the system up till it stopped working and then schedule to bring it back for analysis.

    I believe the hardened hardware is still around a decade old, performance-wise. It's just that performance hasn't changed much in a decade. I do wonder what they do about cooling. You don't have to underclock a modern server processor by much to dispense with the fan, but you still need some airflow over a large surface area heat sink. Maybe they just solved the problems related to shaking/vibration well enough to support a sizable heat sink.

    Or of course you can just use mobile components everywhere, but I don't think that's what this payload is. Anyone know?

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  22. Ob by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Hoy them out of the airlock.

    They'll come down sooner or later.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  23. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well if you read either the original article about it, or you know the article linked here you would know, but cause reading is hard here it a cut/paste:

    The servers were placed in an airtight box with a radiator that is hooked up to the ISS water-cooling system. Hot air from the computers is guided through the radiator to cool down and than circulated back

  24. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    T is not even close to S. Typing hard to.

  25. Complaining about a 3-month delay? by SigNuZX728 · · Score: 1

    They must've never worked with NASA before... Anyway the only cargo vehicle that returns to earth is the Dragon and the last one of those to come back was in December, and that was after the possible abandonment scare from the October Proton failure. Plus these sound pretty big so I wouldn't be surprised if they get bumped a couple times to make room for higher-priority items. Somebody mentioned the uncrewed Dragon demo, but if it's not designed for cargo then it can't take it. It wouldn't have the right restraints and SpaceX may not be able to do the CoG estimates that they need. Also the Soyuz has a little bit of space for cargo, but it's usually Russian priority cargo, so I doubt these old servers will make the cut. They'll get them when they get them.

  26. Talk about uptime! by rune2 · · Score: 1

    It figures it's running Linux! Take that Windows! :-P There's probably a beowulf cluster joke in there somewhere too...

  27. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by BoogieChile · · Score: 1

    Even with a large heatsink, there would need to be fans involved, because heated air wouldn't rise away from the heatsink in microgravity

  28. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

    I do wonder what they do about cooling. You don't have to underclock a modern server processor by much to dispense with the fan, but you still need some airflow over a large surface area heat sink.

    What utility is a fan in the vacuum of space? The real solution is not blasting to space a CPU that generates a lot of heat. That means they'll be "space hardened" SPARCs, or PowerPC, ARM, or Pentium grade chips.

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  29. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by lgw · · Score: 1

    Good point! Though it seems there is case airflow through heatsink to the station.

    I just wonder about the resiliency of cooling fans after launch - normal components really aren't designed for heavy vibration at multiple gs.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  30. Re: I bet it says "Clickbait Title" by lgw · · Score: 1

    It's not a vacuum system. It runs in the pressured area if the ISS, and can dump heat to the ISS via a heatsink.

    The eventual trip to Mars will be similar, I think.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  31. Sure, Analysis Alone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I was an astronaut, I damn well want my equipment validated in the real world! F-U and your "analysis alone"!

    What, you think that a computer is just a collection of chips with perfect interconnects?
    Do you think that assembly of the computer doesn't introduce potential points of failure?
    Do you think that vibration during ascent is irrelevant?
    Do you imagine that the higher radiation environment, inside the Van Allen belts or no, might not challenge the engineering assumptions of COTS hardware?
    Do you ignore the possibilities of exposure to hard vacuum, high humidity and extreme temperature swings, à la Apollo 13?
    Do you disregard the differences between mass storage devices, like HDDs, SDDs, USB sticks, DVD drives and all the rest?

    If I'm an astronaut and my life might depend on the answers, damn straight I want that equipment tested. Especially knowing that it is COTS hardware and not specially engineered, radiation hardened, space flight rated computers. It's even more important then! And nothing less will be acceptable.