Cooler servers for the Internet
wb8foz at nrk.com
Mon Apr 23 14:52:29 UTC 2001
Unnamed Administration sources reported that Sean Donelan said:
> Of course, these numbers are pretty bogus. Most computer manufacture
> specification sheets are useless for accurately forecasting the power
> consumption of the equipment. I suspect, after Sun's PR people realize
> they are getting beat up, they will go back and better calculate the power
> consumption figures for their servers.
> I'm not very interested in who really has the coolest, most efficient
> computers. I am interested in getting accurate information for planning
> purposes. If this leads to computer vendors publishing more accurate
> information, great. I'm afraid instead, the pendulum will swing the
> other direction and vendors will begin understating their true power
The best test I can come up with at the drop of a hat:
Plug server into std. watt-hour meter.
Run benchmark X, Y and/or Z for one hour.
Note KWH's consumed.
This is so trivial a software house could do it if they
had an electrician buy the meter and wire it up with plugs.
It will tell you true KWH's, as that's what they measure. The
meters are highly tracable back to NIST/etc standards  and
they are cheap.
Radical idea: why not call The Donelan Test, and demand it from
1] Want stds that have been beaten on? Use those proven by products
with lots of money changing hands.
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
More information about the NANOG