[tech] Half Height Rack

[Matt Didcoe]

I'm still unsure about the need for a second unit tbqh - the unit we
have now is keeping everything cool with no troubles whatsoever.

The rack Mark has available doesn't have sides or doors.

As others have pointed out, we could just move the posts on the LH
rack, that presents a problem for the Fugro's, but I'd question the
need to have those after we get troppo running as a VM server.

-Matt

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:45 AM, James Andrewartha
<trs80 at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, David Adam wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010, Bob Adamson wrote:
>> > [MRD] has organised for us to acquire a half-height, full depth rack from the
>> > ?Motorola? building. This will allow us to rack mount some of the newer
>> > servers such as maaxen. To put this in, we need to lose one of the racks in
>> > the machine room. This is your invitation to argue about it.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by "full-depth". Are the other racks in the
>> server room not full depth? I know we adjusted the rails on the one
>> closest to the door so that it would fit the ex-FSI servers properly, but
>> the other rack should still have the normal depth.
>
> The working definition is "long enough to properly mount the Sun v20z
> servers in".
>
>> > My personal opinion is that we should remove the right hand (full height)
>> > rack, and put the new one in its place. This would allow us to use the window
>> > above it for a second in-window aircon, instead of buying an overly expensive
>> > dual hose portable. Also, just for the record, we use less than half of the
>> > available rack space in the old full height rack, and there are no machines in
>> > the middle rack that are actually used.
>>
>> That sounds like a good idea. Alternatively we could move the terminals
>> onto the bench and put the half-height rack next to the window if we
>> wanted to keep both full-height racks - but, as you say, we already have
>> lots of unused space.
>
> The right-hand rack has to be the network rack thanks to the length (or
> lack thereof) of the network cabling to the patch panels. They're
> currently well-positioned at eye-level, if they were lower you'd be
> bending down all the time to patch cables. Further, if the rack has a door
> and sides visibility will be impaired.
>
> If the issue is being able to mount a second aircon, then why not just
> leave a section of the rack empty for the airflow to go through?
>
> --
> # TRS-80              trs80(a)ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au #/ "Otherwise Bub here will do \
> # UCC Wheel Member     http://trs80.ucc.asn.au/ #|  what squirrels do best     |
> [ "There's nobody getting rich writing          ]|  -- Collect and hide your   |
> [  software that I know of" -- Bill Gates, 1980 ]\  nuts." -- Acid Reflux #231 /
>