A fundamental precept of technology is that advances will quickly make today’s IT equipment obsolete within a relatively predictable span of 3-4 years. Alternately, the infrastructure supporting that same IT equipment can typically have a lifespan of 15-25 years, or even longer. Structured in terms of lifecycles, the IT equipment will see a minimum of 3-5 lifetimes while connected to a predominantly unchanging infrastructure.

The idea of equipment refreshes within the data center environment is relatively well understood by those in the IT field. When considering the scope of the refresh activity, it may be convenient to think of IT refreshes as having a clear beginning and ending. Unfortunately, it is actually more representative to think of them in terms of both minor and major events.

In most data centers, there is an almost continuous series of incremental (minor) upgrades that occur while opportunities for significant changes to the supporting infrastructure are consequently limited. It is during the more significant (major) upgrades where it makes sense to plan ahead and exploit scenarios that may be presented.

It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that infrastructure supporting an IT installation is relatively static. While that outlook is true from the macro view, it is essential to consider the complete spectrum of opportunities that exist when faced with a major IT refresh.

The question to ask is, “What would I do if…?” This more holistic approach helps to remove artificial barriers erected by inhibited or constrained baseline assumptions. The development of viable options can help to qualify an organisation’s requirements for different infrastructure approaches.

In Figure 1, options have been limited to those addressing the cooling system but can easily be adapted to encompass additional infrastructure elements, such as emergency power, control systems or lighting.

Options overview, or ‘What would you do if?’
Topic	Rating - 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest)
	Option 1	Option 2	Option 3
Cooling System	Reuse Existing	Adapt Existing	TCO Optimised
Depreciation	50%	About 50%	Not Applicable
Capital Cost	1	3	5
Schedule	1	3	5
Energy Usage Cost	5	3	1
Operations & Maintenance Cost	5	3	1
Carbon impact / Use	5	3	1
TCO - Total Cost of Ownership	5	3	1

Figure 1: Cooling system options help qualify an organisation’s requirements for different approaches

In this example, by removing the limitation of a nearly unchanged infrastructure, a gradually increasing scale of change and adaptation is presented.

Using example metrics such as first cost, schedule or carbon impact, a more holistic approach can be used to gauge an organisation’s appetite for infrastructure adaptations.

One of the advantages of the IT refresh is that it may be possible to access historical data or trends of IT equipment utilisation. This data, in whatever forms it can be characterised, can be an invaluable tool for evaluating options as it can influence data points on energy consumption, operations manpower, seasonal profiles and a host of other possibilities.

A standard industry metric for characterising the effectiveness and efficiency of a data center is the Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE) or its inverse, the Data Center infrastructure Efficiency (DCiE). Both are rations of Total Facility Power and IT Equipment Power and can serve as a primary or secondary baseline for options presented previously.

Figure 2 shows varying IT utilisation in terms of both percentage and hours per year, similar to a bin analysis for weather data. These utilisation rates are mapped against each of the options identified in Figure 1 to show representative PUE values.

PUE as a function of annual utilisation profile applied to three different options
Topic	Annual Utilisation Profile Low UtilisationHigh Utilisation					Totals
	0 to 20%	21 to 40%	41 to 60%	61 to 80%	81 to 100%
Current annual hours at each utilisation rate (IT load)	Trivial	5,000 hrs	2,000 hrs	1,760 hrs	Trivial	8,760 hrs
Future annual hours at each utilisation rate (IT load)	Trivial	2,000 hrs	4,000 hrs	2,760hrs	Trivial	8,760 hrs
PUE (IT load/total load for each utilisation rate)
Option 1 - Reuse existing cooling system		PUE 2.00	PUE 1.77	PUE 1.70		PUE 1.80
Option 2 - Adapt existing cooling system		PUE 1.80	PUE 1.70	PUE 1.62		PUE 1.70
Option 3 - TCO Optimised cooling system		PUE 1.30	PUE 1.20	PUE 1.12		PUE 1.20

Figure 2: Annual utilisation profile applied to Options 1-3

As seen from this example data set, the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) optimised cooling system will yield the greatest average PUE across the spectrum of utilisation hours. In this example, the cooling equipment selected, whether reused, adapted or new, will operate most efficiently when IT utilisation rates are increased in the post-refresh data center.

The utilisation data used to populate Figure 2 is most easily obtained through close cooperation with the IT professionals leading the refresh activities. Cross-functional information transfer can be an invaluable tool for analysis when TCO is the target metric.

Opportunities for addressing infrastructure changes during an IT refresh are based on a business case that is ultimately influenced by a fair and unbiased evaluation of options.

The concept of formulating options that are truly vendor-neutral and free from outside influences is no minor undertaking and requires a conscious, vigilant effort. It is key to develop options that do not artificially limit the spectrum of choices such that only one option is established as viable.

Conversely, it can be equally debilitating to generate a matrix of choices, where every possible permutation has been identified. The consequences of trying to validate too many choices can be ‘analysis paralysis’, which ultimately compromises the results.

One potential solution for establishing the correct due diligence choices is to conduct a ranging analysis. In practice, this would include the following typical options:

• Option 1 Maximum Practical Extreme
  The development of Option 1 should be as uninhibited as possible and not limited to a given system or operational mode.
  
  Extremes should cover the spectrum of possibilities and could potentially involve scenarios such as rerouting data center traffic for six months during a complete infrastructure retrofit.
  
  Other potential extreme scenarios could include planning for a 100% increase in compaction at the board level, or preprovisioning for a cooling technology that is not yet commercially viable.
  
  Option 1 should generate the ‘what if’ scenario and act as the upper bracket of Options 2 and 3.
  
• Options 2 and 3 Opportunities Betwee n Maximum and Minimum Extremes
  These options should represent the best mix of holistic tradeoffs that create the most desirable business case. Options 2 and 3 test the boundaries of an unbiased approach, and requiring more than one choice avoids the trap of considering only one possible solution.
  
• Option 4 Minimum Practical Extreme
  Option 4 defines the minimum level of ‘change in state’. This can include minimising the concentration, frequency or invasiveness of an IT refresh, establishing the lowest possible capital cost for an upgrade or potentially reducing TCO by outsourcing some services.
  

The goal of structuring the potential choices into a limited number of options is to help bound the problem without unduly limiting the flexibility necessary to see what is possible. Additional considerations that can be considered include:

• 10% savings on cost of initial build or 50% reduction in disruption during next major refresh;
• Lowest capital cost or lowest five-year TCO cost;
• 25% construction capital cost savings, or free up 25% of cooling capacity;
• 15% construction capital cost savings, or easy future capacity expansion of 25%;
• 10% construction capital cost savings, or provisions for liquid cooling in the future; and
• 10% construction capital cost savings, or using non-potable water instead of potable water.

The percentages, TCO metrics and baseline questions are only examples, but it is evident that holistic tradeoffs are required to assess the impact of any infrastructure upgrade.

The preceding discussion highlighted how a ‘clean slate’ approach to infrastructure upgrades during the IT refresh can help decouple existing limitations and constraints.

A holistic approach is necessary so that variables such as economics, schedule, energy, operations, manpower available technology and ultimately TCO can be fairly evaluated within the context of the refresh parameters.

Whenever possible, the IT refresh cycle should be embraced as a distinct opportunity, since it is one of the few times when a data center can most readily accommodate adaptations, expansions and fundamental changes.