YouTube Video of one of Google's Data Centers - Page 2

SenseiSteve · Post #16 (**permalink**) 06-09-2009, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HostLeet

Who wants to take on the champ?

Apparently, Bing is making a run at it. If Bing falls short, it won't be because they ran short of cash.

HostLeet · Post #17 (**permalink**) 06-09-2009, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve-Hostirian

Apparently, Bing is making a run at it. If Bing falls short, it won't be because they ran short of cash.

So I've heard. Is Bing part of MSN?

DatabaseDesign · Post #18 (**permalink**) 06-09-2009, 03:06 PM

I think Bing is to replace Live, correct me if I am wrong.

SenseiSteve · Post #19 (**permalink**) 06-09-2009, 03:10 PM

Microsoft - here's a relevant story Their search engine penetration has definitely increased.

webfreak08 · Post #20 (**permalink**) 06-10-2009, 06:08 PM

Back on track, guys.

Quote:

Fully agree on the standpoint of global redundancy but I was referring to the compartmentalized design of within that datacenter. I would venture to guess that it is more cost effective and more efficient to control one large raised floor area vs. 30-40 shipping containers. I would love to see the cost benefit analysis for that design... like that's ever going to happen.

Your cost benefit analysis (vague, but you'll get the idea):

Quote:

The huge power draws have spurred innovation in the form factor of the data center itself. For its Chicago center, Microsoft is outfitting half the building with shipping containers packed with servers. “Imagine a data center that’s about 30 megawatts, with standard industry average density numbers you can probably fit 25,000 to 30,000 servers in a facility like that,” says Microsoft’s Chrapaty. “You can do 10 times that in a container-based facility, because the containers offer power density numbers that are very hard to realize in a standard rack-mount environment.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/ma...agewanted=5&hp

So, it's for saving on power costs.