Facebook open sources its servers and data centers • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#91

Post by cosmicray » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 12:41 PM UTC

jemfinch wrote: post #53

kragen wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, but why does it benefit Facebook's bottom line (and Google's!) to open-source that stuff? Wouldn't they be better off if their competitors had to pay those higher costs? It's not as if they have substantial computation-service providers they're buying from, or data-center-oriented companies they're selling to.

Releasing information about this helps others better compete with Facebook's competitors while not diminishing the value of Facebook's core asset at all.

Should the design proliferate into other DCs, it would provide a ready disaster recovery base (perhaps even sharing agreements between different operators).

Was anything mentioned about the OS running the servers ? I presume it is an optimized linux, but who knows.

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#92

Post by chopsueyar » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 12:59 PM UTC

sundars wrote: post #39

flyt wrote: post #8

Get all the CAD files and other specifications here: http://opencompute.org

One of the most important fact form this article which is likely to be overlooked is : "the Prineville facility runs at 85°F with a 65 percent relative humidity". Running at such a high humidity + Temp combination is impressive esp when you look at the money saved in environmental costs.

That quote made it seem like the incoming air was at 65% relative humidity, but...

"which in turns lets Facebook rely on evaporative cooling instead of air conditioning."

So it runs at 65% relative humidity after the swamp coolers.

I doubt this would be possible in datacenters in more tropical environments (south Florida). Thoughts?

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#93

Post by chopsueyar » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 1:03 PM UTC

brownleej wrote: post #74

neilk wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Google could never benefit from Facebook's designs too? Google does a lot of things bespoke, but now they have a model to compare with that is using more off-the-shelf tech. That can only help them in the buy-vs-build decision process. I think you're going overboard in thinking that everything the big players do is about killing the other guy. Sometimes they just want to reduce costs. If you decide that part…

I'd say that efficient data servers are one of google's core competencies. Google does not benefit from having that commoditized.

Well look who is commoditizing it, and it isn't Google.

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#94

Post by chopsueyar » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 1:05 PM UTC

zipdog wrote: post #46

joshus wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook's core advantage is the social graph, not the infrastructure operation, which is Google's thing. Consequently, Facebook has tight grip on the access of its graph whereas Google keeps the secrets about its search algorithm and server setup. By open-source it, Facebook is not only getting good PR but also undercutting the competitor.

This is a nice benefit of two companies competing asynchronously (each has a different core competency). The open source community gets the non-core competency of both. Now if only there was a company whose non-core competency was Google-style spelling check ("Did you mean to search for..")

Sweet, we get self-driving cars and commodity headless servers.

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#95

Post by chopsueyar » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 1:08 PM UTC

kragen wrote: post #12

flyt wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a response to Greenpeace, this is a response to the real costs that it takes to run compute infrastructure at the scale of Facebook, Amazon, Google, etc. If a datacenter can run at 1.07 PUE (as Facebook's new datacenter does), then it directly translates to massive power cost savings. Environmental efficiency just comes along with it.

Okay, but why does it benefit Facebook's bottom line (and Google's!) to open-source that stuff? Wouldn't they be better off if their competitors had to pay those higher costs? It's not as if they have substantial computation-service providers they're buying from, or data-center-oriented companies they're selling to.

They probably compete for the same finite electrical sources, too.

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#96

Post by chopsueyar » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 1:11 PM UTC

kellysutton wrote: post #10

yanw wrote: post #2

Not sure how many startups built their own servers anymore, this event seems like a response to the Greenpeace accusations of Facebook's environmental responsibility or wherever. Edit: I agree it's a good thing, it's just that hosting a press event rather than just making the announcement through a blog post suggests other motives as well.

blip.tv builds and maintains our own servers and data centers. We started before the Cloud though :)

Correction. You created the Cloud.

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#97

Post by chopsueyar » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 1:24 PM UTC

oasisbob wrote: post #72

lrcg wrote: post #25

Ethernet-powered LED lighting :D

I found that interesting too, thought it was a joke at first. The only details I was able to dig up are in the Data Center specs [1], and they're pretty brief: > Energy-efficient LED lighting is used throughout the data center interior. / Innovative power over Ethernet LED lighting system. / Each fixture has an occupancy sensor with manual override. / Programmable alerts via flashing LEDs. I wondered what the justifi…

A couple of guesses. They probably have a lot more cat5/cat6 around than 3-conductor 12 gauge copper wire (not sure if it is cheaper by the foot).

Also, the network switches can output the PoE, so maybe it is easier to wire into/from the racks or overhead than a seperate AC line with conduit.

Labor installation and material costs may be less.

Also, since it is DC, and not an AC lighting source, interference may be less (just a guess).

And as you mentioned, the lighting as instrumentation.

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#98

Post by Flenser » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 1:46 PM UTC

wmf wrote: post #55

ignifero wrote: post #54

Shall we expect Google, Amazon, Microsoft et. al. to start posting their energy efficiency stats from tomorrow?

Way ahead of you: http://www.google.com/corporate/datacenter/efficiency-measur...

Looked through Google's numbers but they don't seem to be directly comparable to Facebook's. Anyone know how far apart they are?

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#99

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 2:42 PM UTC

codex wrote: post #60

This is a strategic attack on Google. A proliferation of scalable data centers hurts Google a lot more than Facebook by enabling Google's competitors. Cheap computation matters much more to search engines than social networking sites.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook open sources its servers and data centers

#100

Post by bhousel » Fri, Apr 08, 2011, 3:36 PM UTC

chopsueyar wrote: post #97

oasisbob wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found that interesting too, thought it was a joke at first. The only details I was able to dig up are in the Data Center specs [1], and they're pretty brief: > Energy-efficient LED lighting is used throughout the data center interior. / Innovative power over Ethernet LED lighting system. / Each fixture has an occupancy sensor with manual override. / Programmable alerts via flashing LEDs. I wondered what the justifi…

A couple of guesses. They probably have a lot more cat5/cat6 around than 3-conductor 12 gauge copper wire (not sure if it is cheaper by the foot). Also, the network switches can output the PoE, so maybe it is easier to wire into/from the racks or overhead than a seperate AC line with conduit. Labor installation and material costs may be less. Also, since it is DC, and not an AC lighting source, interference may be le…

All true. Right now 14/3 Romex costs about 3x more than Cat5. Copper is expensive!

LED lamps use DC power. The LED lamps that you can buy that screw into a standard Edison socket contain electronics to convert the AC line voltage into DC. This is inefficient -- generates heat and wastes power (though still not nearly as much as a traditional incandescent bulb).

By using power over Ethernet for their lighting, the datacenter can use cheaper, cooler, more efficient bulbs, and save a lot of money on the wiring too.

I can definitely foresee a future where new construction includes wiring for both line voltage AC and also low voltage DC. It could eliminate all the bulky transformers scattered around a typical house and save energy and money.