From: tim guinn (guinn@mail.utexas.edu)
Date: Fri Nov 21 2003 - 13:39:08 EST
firstly, i want to thank those (several!) of you who replied to my post yesterday. your insight is much appreciated.
as most all of you pointed out, the solution i'd first considered:
server1-->powersequencer1/2-->ups1-->building1
server2-->powersequencer2/1-->ups1-->building1
did not provide any redundancy. i knew that, however, the apc 5000s--which apart from some models in the 3000 series seem to be the only mid-range upses with appropriate receptacles for the powersequencer's cable--are prohibitively expensive.
i would prefer doing something like:
server1-->powersequencer1/2-->ups1--building1
server2-->powersequencer2/1-->ups2--building2
so i looked at the 3000 series, which can be had for around 1300 usd/ea and which have the right l6-20 & l6-30 receptacles. however... those are rated at 2700 watts and 3000 va. and when i add up all the hardware we're putting in the rack, i get 2304 watts and 3291 va for everything, which includes a 30% growth/comfort allowance.
so my dilemma now is:
1) is the amp figure more important than watts?
2) is the 30% (which apc's configurator uses in its calculations) 'written in stone'
personally, i think the 3000 is pushing the limit, given the figures at hand. but the 5000 series ups costs more than a couple of the servers they're buying, together!
thoughts?
thx again...
-- tim guinn senior systems analyst 668 - the neighbor of the beast _______________________________________________ sunmanagers mailing list sunmanagers@sunmanagers.org http://www.sunmanagers.org/mailman/listinfo/sunmanagers
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Wed Apr 09 2008 - 23:27:32 EDT