Intel Simplifies the Data Center

[HardOCP News]

Intel Corporation took a further step today to simplify the data center by introducing a free new technology that enables all data center traffic to run over a single cable using the Intel® 10 Gigabit Ethernet (10 GbE) Server Adapter X520 family.

Unified networking allows IT departments to create flexible superhighways in virtualized data centers by consolidating multiple data and storage networks onto a single 10GbE network. The consolidation of cabling equipment can help reduce global IT spending by $3 billion a year, and the 400 million feet of global data center cabling saved is enough to wrap around the Earth three times.

 

[Zencyl]

So this is really only going to help large companies that store everything for their employees and all their data in the same data center as their servers right? They trying to push for more and more virtualization?

 

[Wirth'sLaw]

Is 10GbE enough for a single large data center anyway?

Does anyone really think a company like Microsoft, Google, Boeing, Qualcomm, etc. could run a single data center like this?

Intel, if you need someone to test that though I'm down!

 

[djiliff]

It should say all "types" of data center traffic, which is to say "all 2 types"; which are IP networking, and fiber-channel networking. This type of adapter is available from other manufacturers and is commonly referred to as the Converged Network Adapter (NIC + HBA = CNA), but there is a war of marketing going on right now as companies race to brand the new type infrastructure and form or strengthen their alliances and establish themselves as leaders, where a single type of switch can support both IP and FC, rather than having both an IP switch and an FC switch.

Given the crazy number of processing cores and massive amounts of RAM todays blade-server chassis can support, there has been a ridiculous build-up of cabling requirements to support them. This technology reduces the number of cables you need on that chassis. The smaller footprint of the servers, the reduced type and number of switches, etc. all add up to lower cost, lower power, smaller footprint... all good.

But this technology is not very scalable right now. The switches that can support it are very new and very basic in their features. It works, but it is not yet proven in the most demanding production environments or on anything but a small scale. Today the thinking/pitch is to install it today with a few features working and reap the rewards in the future when "they" upgrade the firmware and fill out the solution sets. It could be a good idea, depending on the business needs. The first draft standards are settling down but there is more that needs to be standardized before this becomes mainstream. Expect lots of confusing messaging, conflicting marketing, and an acronym war for the next several years.

Bottom line, this new technology will help reduce carbon footprint, physical footprint, labor, and ultimately result in big cost reductions for data center deployments, which is why it will absolutely be commonplace once the dust settles. The progress is happening rapidly. Its all driven by the goals of convergence and virtualization to shrink the data center.

BTW: You don't need this outside the data center or on less than 10Gb of bandwidth, so don't expect your laptop or gaming PC to get this (iSCSI works great for those network storage needs.) And the first 100Gb offerings of this type of technology are showing up now too. That ought to reduce your data center cabling a bit. Still, I'd want at least two cables for HA.

 

[Azhar]

Is 10GbE enough for a single large data center anyway?

Does anyone really think a company like Microsoft, Google, Boeing, Qualcomm, etc. could run a single data center like this?

Intel, if you need someone to test that though I'm down!

I'm thinking 10x fewer switches and/or fewer routers since 10x more data can travel in a 10GbE cable. Less switch and router management to deal with.

What's the throughput on a decent NAS server? If we needed, say, 5 NAS only because the speed of a gigabit network is too slow to deal with so many people rather than the speed of a NAS server, having a single NAS with more drives would be more efficient with a 10GbE pipe. But my speculation is only true if a NAS server throughput is higher than a gigabit line.