Upload
apu
View
52
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
SCD Computing Center Expansion. Aaron Andersen SCD User Forum 5/18/2005. Phase 1: SCD Internal Analysis. Growing Model Complexity. Power problem: P = C V 2 f Frequency (clock) increase driving Moore’s Law Decreasing voltage increases gate delay (hurts performance) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
SCD Computing Center Expansion
Aaron Andersen
SCD User Forum
5/18/2005
Phase 1: SCD Internal Analysis
1/1/2003 1/1/20045/5/2002 7/1/2004
SCD Executive RetreatInfrastructure Impacts
Computing In AtmosphericSciences
Discussions with other Peer Centers
Analysis of Computing Futures& Infrastructure Needs
Initial DiscussionsLoft & Andersen
SCD Strategic Planning Effort
Growing Model ComplexityGrowing Model Complexity
Chips: Faster, Cheaper but Hotter
• Power problem: • P = C V2 f
– Frequency (clock) increase driving Moore’s Law
– Decreasing voltage increases gate delay (hurts performance)
– Capacitance increases as gate count increases.
• Chip power consumption will increase 30% over 5 years.
• Processor costs decreasing at 29%/year.
Mesa Lab Power Limit
The Problem with the Mesa Lab Facility
• NCAR’s machine room was built during the era of low power/high cost computing systems (1976).– 13000 sq ft– 1.2 MW computer power limitation– 80 W/sq ft cooling design
• We live in an era in which high power/low cost computing systems are available.
• It is not cheap to modify the power infrastructure of Mesa Lab Computing Facility, nor does it make sense without expanding the machine room floor.
• Site situated on bedrock.• If we do nothing, the Mesa Lab power and design
limitations will become a serious constraint on NCAR’s scientific computing capacity. This is true for both future vector and microprocessor systems.
Recap of Phase 1 Conclusions
• Three Driving Issues for a Facility Expansion– Geoscience: Exponential demand for supercomputing– Technology: CMOS is getting hotter and cheaper
– Engineering: Mesa Lab facility design is obsolescent • Recommended responses on three timescales
– Short term (1 year): • Mesa Lab risk mitigation (RMH, Inc.)
– Medium term (2 years):• Lease options (Staubach Real Estate)• Colocation (Inflow, Inc., Level 3)
– Long term (3-5 years):• Refurbishment of existing structures (RNL Design, Inc.)• New construction (Uptime Institute, Inc.)
Phase 2: Analysis of Facility Options
8/1/2004 9/1/2004 10/1/20047/1/2004 10/22/2004
Feasibility StudyCenter Green 3
Final Report on CG3$26 M and No Expansion
UCAR Board of TrusteesUpdate
Uptime Institute SeminarUCAR Executive Management
Planning and Justifyinga Data Center Project
Evaluation of Leased SpaceOptions
NCAR ExecutiveUpdate on Data Center Options
Phase 2 Conclusions
• Center Green 3 was not as capable as hoped– $26M to create a CG3 data center smaller than ML facility.– No room for expansion
• Existing Computer Room Spaces on Market– Most not adequate for anticipated power densities or loads.– One that was acceptable was purchased by another entity.
• Strategy Moving Forward– Act to maximize life and capabilities of Mesa Lab facility,– Move forward on building a data center expansion.
Preservation of theMesa Lab Facility
• Perform a Risk Assessment– Ensure capability of reliably housing
~ 1 – 1.2 MW of computing– Evaluate the capabilities of infrastructure
equipment
Phase 3: Facility Design Process
1/1/200510/22/2004 6/1/2005
Conceptual DesignRFP for Data
Center Expansion
Risk AssessmentReport
RiskAssessment for
Mesa Lab
Statement of Work for PeerReview & Conceptual Design
Develop Conceptual Design
Peer Review RFPPeer Review Award
Conceptual Design Award
Preliminary SiteSelection
Update NCAR Execon Risk Assessment
Conceptual Design& Cost Estimate Due
Peer Review ofConceptual Design
Today
Develop ReportRecomendations
Design Concepts
Land for 20 Years
Building Shell for 10
Outfit for 5Strategy preservesinitial capital investmentas computing hardwareevolves rapidly.
Majority of cost in thistype of facility in outfittingmechanical and electricalsystems.
Facility Design Concept
20,000 sq. ft.4 MW
20,000 sq. ft.4 MW
20,000 sq. ft.
M/E Space
Computers
Staff/Support
20,000 sq. ft.4 MW
20,000 sq. ft.4 MW
20,000 sq. ft.
Initial ModuleModule 2 Module 3
20,000 sq. ft.4MW
20,000 sq. ft.4 MW
20,000 sq. ft.
Expand laterally
Architectural Detail
Office Space
Network Operation Center
Data Center
Mechanical/Electrical
Architectural View
Phase 2 Addition
Phase 3Addition
Next Steps
• Conceptual Design & Cost Estimate is due as I present this
• Developing full report on findings
• Develop funding strategies/options – UCAR Management– Board of Trustees– NSF