Live data from Hacker News

96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

simbimbo.wordpress.com

151–159 of 159 posts

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My first thought was, "Wouldn't a folded beermat have sufficed?"

Lots of DCs refuse to let you bring cardboard into the hall _at all_, never-mind keeping some in a rack.

It is a complete no-no, even if your DC doesn't say anything to you about it.

Just think of the potential loss of equipment if the sprinklers were to activate in a datacenter suite -- and if the flammable material is located in your cage, it's going to be you or your insurance covering that.

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#152
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Potential reason is that they need see how their tests affect screen burn. They mention they specifically need Mac hardware so this could be why they specifically need retina screens.

It might have more to do with running GPU-assisted tasks through remote sessions. You need to either leave a screen attached and on or trick the device into thinking one is attached and on to take full advantage of the GPU on Mac hardware. You can actually do it with any mac hardware (even headless devices like Mac Mini's and Mac Pro's) but it's not advertised well enough. For example, with mac Mini's in a server env…

The HDMI dongle is a good solution for most users. It can also be worked around in software (although it is not trivial). It's kind of annoying that OS X requires jumping through these hoops, but at least there's a few solutions out there.

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With enterprise-ready hardware though, not consumers laptops that fail within a few years, even when they're not turned on 24/7.

Are there good reasons to believe that "enterprise" hardware is more reliable in practice? Anecdotally, most desktops I used lived much longer than most servers I worked woth. I know a Compaq desktop that worked as a server for 11 years. Still does. One hardware failure in that entire time. (Power supply.) Could be a result of lower workload, but still...

There are superior aspects to the design of "enterprise" hardware (or rather, rack mounted server hardware) that have been mentioned by others: ECC RAM, redundant PSUs and HDDs, motherboard designs that (hopefully) are laid out for ideal airflow, etc.

Putting all of this aside though, the real secret to the superiority of hardware meant for the datacenter often comes down to the practice of binning. Manufacturers have different tolerances for the products they produce; hence why Intel has a million models of CPUs, Seagate produces so many different hard drives and Samsung sells DRAM chips to other vendors and makes their own DIMMs.

The products that perform the best are binned in the server-y bins, the others are moved down the list until they fit another bin. No manufacturer wants to discard parts if they can possibly avoid it.

Sometimes you're actually getting a deal, but a lot of the time you're just trading reliability for cost when you use lower binned items like desktop hard drives in a server environment. Sometimes that trade-off is worth it though.

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there good reasons to believe that "enterprise" hardware is more reliable in practice? Anecdotally, most desktops I used lived much longer than most servers I worked woth. I know a Compaq desktop that worked as a server for 11 years. Still does. One hardware failure in that entire time. (Power supply.) Could be a result of lower workload, but still...

Really?? ECC RAM and redundant PSUs alone should be unquestioned advantages over standard desktops. Not to mention hardware raid controllers, IPMIs, designs that allow fans and other parts to be serviced without downtime... :P

Sure, but we're not speaking about overall system reliability. We're speaking about hardware dying. RAID will prevent data loss, but your actual disks might fail as often as something from vanilla PC.

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really?? ECC RAM and redundant PSUs alone should be unquestioned advantages over standard desktops. Not to mention hardware raid controllers, IPMIs, designs that allow fans and other parts to be serviced without downtime... :P

Sure, but we're not speaking about overall system reliability. We're speaking about hardware dying. RAID will prevent data loss, but your actual disks might fail as often as something from vanilla PC.

Okay, to address it from that aspect then:

ECC RAM will both work-around and warn you about the start of RAM failures before complete DIMM failure.

And sure, consumer drives have the same MTBF as enterprise drives in practice[1], but: when RAIDing consumer disks, make sure that you get models that immediately report read/write errors, instead of retrying, which is the main (or only, if SATA) difference between enterprise and consumer drives.

If you have a nice RAID setup, you DO NOT want a drive to retry a failed block read 15 times before reporting a problem, and causing latency: you want the failed read to be reported immediately, so your controller can pull the same block from a different disk, and start diagnosing possible faults.

1 https://www.backblaze.com/blog/enterprise-drive-reliability/

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#156
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of DCs refuse to let you bring cardboard into the hall _at all_, never-mind keeping some in a rack.

It is a complete no-no, even if your DC doesn't say anything to you about it. Just think of the potential loss of equipment if the sprinklers were to activate in a datacenter suite -- and if the flammable material is located in your cage, it's going to be you or your insurance covering that.

Usually the fire suppression is halon-like gas systems (can't use halon anymore), sprinklers are an absolute worst case last resort.

But yeah, there's plenty of

  NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR
  NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR
  NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR
At every multi-tentant dc.

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#157
post #156
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a complete no-no, even if your DC doesn't say anything to you about it. Just think of the potential loss of equipment if the sprinklers were to activate in a datacenter suite -- and if the flammable material is located in your cage, it's going to be you or your insurance covering that.

Usually the fire suppression is halon-like gas systems (can't use halon anymore), sprinklers are an absolute worst case last resort. But yeah, there's plenty of NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR At every multi-tentant dc.

I have only seen dry-pipe water systems lately, since halon is long gone.

I did see one system that used HI-FOG sprinklers. Smaller water droplets are supposedly able to extinguish a fire with significantly less water. You're still sad, but maybe you can salvage more equipment.

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#158
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What trick? Of course they'll add USB type-C to MBP. If you ask whether they'll keep regular USB or thunderbolt, perhaps but just for a few releases more. E.g. both could be gone by 2018. That said, MPB will of course have > 1 USB C ports.

The trick - having only one connector. For normal macbooks they will probably have multiple USB-C (for power and other stuff), maybe one USB-B, a card reader, video etc.

What seems to be happening is that we are re-inventing PCI.

Re: 96 MacBook Pro’s in one server rack

#159
post #157
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually the fire suppression is halon-like gas systems (can't use halon anymore), sprinklers are an absolute worst case last resort. But yeah, there's plenty of NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR NO CARDBOARD ON THE DC FLOOR At every multi-tentant dc.

I have only seen dry-pipe water systems lately, since halon is long gone. I did see one system that used HI-FOG sprinklers. Smaller water droplets are supposedly able to extinguish a fire with significantly less water. You're still sad, but maybe you can salvage more equipment.

I've seen a few chem agent and inert gas systems, but only when someone realized cost of equipment + loss from downtime > cost fire suppression system, which is less often than it should be.

dry pipe systems are probably the most common though.

Post reply on HN