North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Google's PUE

  • From: Daniel Golding
  • Date: Thu Oct 02 15:17:33 2008

On Oct 1, 2008, at 3:06 PM, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:


On Oct 1, 2008, at 2:04 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:

Personally, I think only a self-owned DC could get that low.  A
general purpose DC would have too many inefficiencies since someone
like Equinix must have randomly sized cages, routers and servers,
custom-built suites, etc.  By owning both sides, GOOG gets a boost.
But it's still frickin' amazing, IMHO.

I wonder what it cost? :-)

What cost to the environment of not doing it?

OK, green hat off. :)  Seriously, I doubt GOOG isn't seeing serious
savings from this over time.  If they weren't why would they do it?

They seem to be very environment focused, so I'm sure doing
anything that isn't is subject to scrutiny from the rest of the industry.

	Hopefully it won't come around to bite them. I had read an
article on "The Planet" going as green as possible, then they had the
huge outage and I'm sure negated 2-3 times what they had done to that
point.

Tuc/TBOH


The Planet had an outage because something blew up and the fire department made them shut everything down. I wouldn't assume any sort of linkage between efficient design and power savings, except that one way to get very efficient design is to remove redundant components. I don't think Google, or the Planet, or anyone else is doing that, though.