September 12, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item 35K
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
September 14, 2009 at 7:12 am
Although this makes sense from a $$ standpoint it sounds like a horrible choice from a security standpoint.
35,000 servers, all in one building, makes one hell of a target.
Since they undoubtably have their own emergency generators, power is not an issue.
However the communications lines certainly are. Knock out the comm lines and they will be down for hours, if not days.
And, given the number of times "bad guys" have easily taken out whole buildings around the world, it all causes me to ask...
What the hell were they thinking?!?
I would expect this building to be as high if not higher value target to terrorist groups than the world trade center.
And Oklahoma City reminds us that not all terrorists are foreign...
September 14, 2009 at 7:16 am
Its not really the point of the editorial but I also was wondering what the DR strategy was for this data centre.
I presume there is a duplicate somewhere? (twice the carbon footprint)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
September 14, 2009 at 8:49 am
DR is a good point.
As far as a target, that's possible, but this is an R&D lab. Presumably there is no issue for the company running if it were to be destroyed. Work would slow down, but the day to day business would continue to run.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
September 14, 2009 at 9:17 am
Its a good bet they are VM's as well I suppose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
September 14, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Yep, if you read the article they mention that they make heavy use of Windows 2008 R2 and HyperV
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
September 15, 2009 at 6:58 am
george sibbald (9/14/2009)
Its not really the point of the editorial but I also was wondering what the DR strategy was for this data centre.I presume there is a duplicate somewhere? (twice the carbon footprint)
I suddenly have this vision of Ballmer and Gates looking through the Windows Server EULA and realizing they can have a "passive backup" without having to pay for extra licenses from Microsoft.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
September 15, 2009 at 8:00 am
I do not understand the point of trying to differentiate between efficient operations for the sake of the planet and for financial benefit. Is the implication that it would be better if companies like MS made costly choices to reduce energy consumption, thus somehow magnifying their altruistic intentions? That would just be bad business, and over time, would put such companies at competitive disadvantage, threatening their survival. Then what of their efforts to be "green?" The only way to avoid competitive disadvantage in such situations would be to promote perceived benefit to customers of choosing the green alternative, which we are seeing in the flood of green advertising. Kinda like organic produce. But isn't it so much more beneficial when financial considerations lead companies to decisions that make them more efficient in areas like energy use? That way, all good business leaders contribute to the efficient allocation of resources, and the weaker businesses end up paying too much for inefficient technology, making it more likely that they will go out of business, thus reducing negative impact. Ah, the market is a wonderful thing.
September 16, 2009 at 9:34 am
Ultimately companies do things for financial reasons. However there is a moral component, and that makes sense to varying degrees, depending on leadership.
Lots of companies were happy to do business with South Africa when I was a kid, but many of them pulled out because of apartheid. That wasn't the financial thing to do, except that they felt there was a cost due to protests.
As much as I think companies should do things for profit, I would hate to live in a world where they don't consider the morality, or the environment, in their actions. It's not necessarily the primary or driving force, but it should be a consideration.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply