Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

wiki.eth0.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 250 posts

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#101

Post by skrtskrt »

strbean wrote: post #97
bombcar wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This non-rounded numbers make people think that there's something terribly important at being X degrees and not X+1, not realizing that the internal temps vary widely even when set specific. I feel recipes have caused more people to avoid cooking than anything invented in the last 1000 years, heh.

With regard to recipes, I sometimes wonder if "round numbers" are causing us to miss out on more optimal recipes. Maybe that dish really would turn out better cooked at 176F, or with 1 and 7/16 cups of flour instead of 1.5.

I think you're only going to see that benefit if, as mentioned you have a super precise oven, or you're getting super precise ingredient quality every time.

Otherwise there's too many variables fluctuating every time to really attribute much to those tiny variations in the recipe.

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#102

Post by ska »

silicon2401 wrote: post #23

can somebody with more server/home server experience explain to me the benefit of going with a rackmount setup vs let's say, just building a second PC to use as a home server? I recently bought a house and am excited to get into home networking/home server work, but don't know anything about rack mount. Is rackmount equipment cheaper than regular consumer PC hardware?

> Is rackmount equipment cheaper than regular consumer PC hardware?

Not even close for new, but a generation or two old can be had very cheaply.

I was was once gifted a 128 node cluster (with the racks, UPS, everything) to a lab for the tax write off alone - they even provided shipping. The servers were only 3 years old iirc, but had depreciated enough on their books I guess and they wanted a faster cluster.

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#103

Post by weberer »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #10
bmitc wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack is made out of super cheap particle board. Is it stable enough to sit the 3D printer on? I would assume it would add some errors to the printing process.

I'm not even sure I'd trust it to hold more than a single 1U server as depicted in the article, for that matter.

I think you're severely underestimating the strength of particle board.

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#104

Post by ska »

jakeinspace wrote: post #28
derekerdmann wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is rackmount equipment cheaper than regular consumer PC hardware? Never

You can find incredibly cheap (nearly free) used servers for pickup if you’re patient. If you have cheap electricity (or better yet, provided with your lease), a 2013-era dual Xeon server is pretty compelling at $50.

That part about power is key. Some of the commercial gear is thirsty enough you'll notice it right away on your bill.

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#105

Post by rustyminnow »

Teever wrote: post #54
buffet_overflow wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s perfectly adequate for stability. People have suspended printers in midair with elastic cables, or printed upside down, and prints have come out fine. The printer frame is providing most of the rigidity in this case. Don’t get me wrong, people that place their printers on spring like things tend to get lower quality prints so there is a limit there. The downside about the IKEA particleboard over hollow cardboard…

Oh boy is this thread relevant to me. I just bought a concrete paver and neoprene mat to put on top of my lack and I'm printing pieces for my lack enclosure on my ender 3 as I type this message. One thing I'm not sure about is whether or not I should attach the printer directly to the concrete paver, and/or if I should take the rubber feet off of the printer as well. If so how do I best attach it?

I have a 3-lack-stack for my printer, but no paver. It sways a bit when I print, but I haven't run into any major issues without it. I should get one. A foam mat was mandatory though; the hollow core lack turns the motor noise into a scream!

I'd just try the easy thing first and set the printer on the paver without attaching. See if that works before you go through the effort of attaching it

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#106

Post by brewdad »

silicon2401 wrote: post #25
michaelhoffman wrote: post #18

Given how many Lack tables I've seen fall apart without any sort of load, I would be very reluctant to try this, no matter how many people report it works for them. It's IKEA's cheapest table for a reason.

In my experience, even cheap IKEA stuff is pretty solid and well worth the cost as long as you treat it with care. Some stuff is garbage even if you're careful but I've never personally seen something from IKEA that isn't great if handled gently.

In my experience, you get one move from IKEA furniture. By the time you've relocated it twice, whether across the room or across the country, it will become unstable and likely to fail.

If you are exceptionally careful and always have help moving anything of size, you may do better.

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#107

Post by bombcar »

layer8 wrote: post #94
bombcar wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The IVAR system is, in my book, absolute complete junk. I couldn't get it to even attempt to work correctly, it wobbled when it wasn't collapsing, and to make insult even worse, it was more expensive than actual industrial wire shelving.

Did you forget to add cross-braces [0]? Ivar has always been rock-solid for me. [0] https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/observatoer-cross-brace-galvani...

Even with cross bracing it had too much wobble, which would pull the short pins out of the cross board, and if you bumped a shelf it would hop out and then fall.

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#108

Post by graftak »

LaputanMachine wrote: post #90
londons_explore wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

S3... Harder to use... Gotta pay egress.... It seems worse all round.

On top of that, Imgur automatically deletes EXIF data, which would've prevented GGP from leaking their home address.

This touches a semi-related nerve. When you share a photo on iOS there’s an option to remove exif data—or at least the photo’s location—but there’s no way to always have it removed by default. Really annoying and easy to forget. /rant

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#109

Post by bombcar »

strbean wrote: post #97
bombcar wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This non-rounded numbers make people think that there's something terribly important at being X degrees and not X+1, not realizing that the internal temps vary widely even when set specific. I feel recipes have caused more people to avoid cooking than anything invented in the last 1000 years, heh.

With regard to recipes, I sometimes wonder if "round numbers" are causing us to miss out on more optimal recipes. Maybe that dish really would turn out better cooked at 176F, or with 1 and 7/16 cups of flour instead of 1.5.

They somewhat do - this is the "skill" in being a chef, knowing what ingredients to add/reduce to get the result you want.

Re: LackRack: IKEA's cheapest table is perfectly sized to rackmount computers (2020)

#110

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

strbean wrote: post #97
bombcar wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This non-rounded numbers make people think that there's something terribly important at being X degrees and not X+1, not realizing that the internal temps vary widely even when set specific. I feel recipes have caused more people to avoid cooking than anything invented in the last 1000 years, heh.

With regard to recipes, I sometimes wonder if "round numbers" are causing us to miss out on more optimal recipes. Maybe that dish really would turn out better cooked at 176F, or with 1 and 7/16 cups of flour instead of 1.5.

When it comes to flour, I don't understand why the USA insists on measuring it by volume when the rest of the world does it by mass. The density of flour can vary widely depending on if it's packed at all, and scooping it often leads to voids in the bottom of the measuring cup that you likely won't see unless you're using a clear measuring cup.

When using flour or baking mixes, I convert to grams (1 cup all-purpose flour = 125 grams) and do it by mass to ensure it's the proper amount.

Post reply on HN