Special Coverage Series

Network Computing

Special Coverage Series


3 Lessons Learned from Feds' Data Center Consolidation

Three years after officials launched an initiative to reduce the number of federal data centers, the count has only increased. The fiasco offers lessons for IT executives managing their own consolidation plans.

The ongoing effort to reduce the federal government’s inventory of data centers appears stymied by changing definitions, a lack of resources, and skepticism. The troubled project provides a cautionary tale for IT executives facing their own data center consolidation initiatives.

Testifying before a House subcommittee late last month, federal CIO Steven VanRoekel told legislators that his expansion of the definition of what constitutes a data center is the reason that the federal data center count now stands at more than 7,000.

More Insights

Webcasts

More >>

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

That’s 5,000 more than were thought to exist when former federal CIO Vivek Kundra first proposed the so-called Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative (FDCCI) in 2010.

Not that there hasn’t been progress: VanRoekel says 484 federal data centers have been shuttered since the effort began, and he claims another 855 are on track to close by September 30, the end of the federal fiscal year.

But the fact that the data center count keeps growing has some observers wondering whether the program can succeed, or whether it’s even the right effort for a federal government that’s saddled with swaths of aging legacy systems and excessive duplication of applications -- challenges that aren’t exactly foreign to large corporations.

“It’s not just about just data centers,” said Steve O’Keeffe, founder of MeriTalk, a public-private partnership that works to promote more efficient government IT. “The data center element is just a symptom of the challenge.”

O’Keeffe knew the challenges facing FDCCI were worsening when he testified before the House subcommittee in May and no one from either the Office of Management and Budget (which includes VanRoekel) or the General Services Administration showed up.

“To have a hearing on federal data centers and cloud computing without anyone from OMB or GSA is like Disneyland without Mickey Mouse,” O’Keeffe said.

Still, VanRoekel’s presence at that initial hearing would not have changed the big picture. The way O’Keeffe sees it, FDCCI is destined to fail for a number of reasons, ranging from the aforementioned growing data center count and a lack of resources at the agency level to shrinking morale and an ill-advised strategy.

[Taking a software and data-driven approach can help reduce costs and maintain availability as IT becomes more complex. Read about one of the companies in this emerging area in "Tackling Information Infrastructure Complexity."]

Many of the issues FDCCI faces should ring familiar for enterprise IT leaders, who often are saddled with underfunded, poorly thought out mandates that chip away at morale.

In fact, a couple of the ways O’Keeffe said FDCCI has gone wrong would seem to offer up lessons to such besieged IT executives:

• While one of the main drivers for the federal effort was a desire to reduce electricity bills, which account for 12 percent of data center costs, no one has been able to pinpoint how those costs break down for each data center. “If you don’t know how much it costs to power each data center, how do you know which ones to consolidate?” O'Keeffe asked.

Lesson for IT leaders: Figure out which data center resources are power hogs so you know what needs to go.

• Application sprawl must be addressed. According to the Government Accountability Office, federal agencies are running 777 separate supply chain systems and 620 different human resources systems. O’Keeffe said the U.S. Army runs more than 100 operating systems in its data center to support an array of legacy applications. “If you can’t close down an application, then you can’t close down a data center," he said.

Lesson for IT leaders: Start by aggressively rationalizing your application portfolio lest your consolidation effort leaves you with an over-taxed infrastructure.

To understand just how wrong a data center consolidation can go, consider the findings of MeriTalk’s recent survey of 200 federal data center operators. Not only did 56 percent give their agencies’ consolidation efforts a grade of C or below -- a clear sign of a project headed south -- a whopping 45 percent believe that it’s more likely they’ll win the lottery, the Washington Redskins will win the next Super Bowl, or another large meteor will hit the Earth than agencies will meet FDCCI objectives.

Far from a glowing endorsement, but it serves as a third lesson -- an important reminder to IT execs that they’d be well advised to consider their data center teams’ perspectives before going full steam with consolidation mandates.



Related Reading



Network Computing encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, Network Computing moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. Network Computing further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

 
Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | Please read our commenting policy.
 

Editor's Choice

Research: 2014 State of Server Technology

Research: 2014 State of Server Technology

Buying power and influence are rapidly shifting to service providers. Where does that leave enterprise IT? Not at the cutting edge, thatís for sure: Only 19% are increasing both the number and capability of servers, budgets are level or down for 60% and just 12% are using new micro technology.
Get full survey results now! »

Vendor Turf Wars

Vendor Turf Wars

The enterprise tech market used to be an orderly place, where vendors had clearly defined markets. No more. Driven both by increasing complexity and Wall Street demands for growth, big vendors are duking it out for primacy -- and refusing to work together for IT's benefit. Must we now pick a side, or is neutrality an option?
Get the Digital Issue »

WEBCAST: Software Defined Networking (SDN) First Steps

WEBCAST: Software Defined Networking (SDN) First Steps


Software defined networking encompasses several emerging technologies that bring programmable interfaces to data center networks and promise to make networks more observable and automated, as well as better suited to the specific needs of large virtualized data centers. Attend this webcast to learn the overall concept of SDN and its benefits, describe the different conceptual approaches to SDN, and examine the various technologies, both proprietary and open source, that are emerging.
Register Today »

Related Content

From Our Sponsor

How Data Center Infrastructure Management Software Improves Planning and Cuts Operational Cost

How Data Center Infrastructure Management Software Improves Planning and Cuts Operational Cost

Business executives are challenging their IT staffs to convert data centers from cost centers into producers of business value. Data centers can make a significant impact to the bottom line by enabling the business to respond more quickly to market demands. This paper demonstrates, through a series of examples, how data center infrastructure management software tools can simplify operational processes, cut costs, and speed up information delivery.

Impact of Hot and Cold Aisle Containment on Data Center Temperature and Efficiency

Impact of Hot and Cold Aisle Containment on Data Center Temperature and Efficiency

Both hot-air and cold-air containment can improve the predictability and efficiency of traditional data center cooling systems. While both approaches minimize the mixing of hot and cold air, there are practical differences in implementation and operation that have significant consequences on work environment conditions, PUE, and economizer mode hours. The choice of hot-aisle containment over cold-aisle containment can save 43% in annual cooling system energy cost, corresponding to a 15% reduction in annualized PUE. This paper examines both methodologies and highlights the reasons why hot-aisle containment emerges as the preferred best practice for new data centers.

Monitoring Physical Threats in the Data Center

Monitoring Physical Threats in the Data Center

Traditional methodologies for monitoring the data center environment are no longer sufficient. With technologies such as blade servers driving up cooling demands and regulations such as Sarbanes-Oxley driving up data security requirements, the physical environment in the data center must be watched more closely. While well understood protocols exist for monitoring physical devices such as UPS systems, computer room air conditioners, and fire suppression systems, there is a class of distributed monitoring points that is often ignored. This paper describes this class of threats, suggests approaches to deploying monitoring devices, and provides best practices in leveraging the collected data to reduce downtime.

Cooling Strategies for Ultra-High Density Racks and Blade Servers

Cooling Strategies for Ultra-High Density Racks and Blade Servers

Rack power of 10 kW per rack or more can result from the deployment of high density information technology equipment such as blade servers. This creates difficult cooling challenges in a data center environment where the industry average rack power consumption is under 2 kW. Five strategies for deploying ultra-high power racks are described, covering practical solutions for both new and existing data centers.

Power and Cooling Capacity Management for Data Centers

Power and Cooling Capacity Management for Data Centers

High density IT equipment stresses the power density capability of modern data centers. Installation and unmanaged proliferation of this equipment can lead to unexpected problems with power and cooling infrastructure including overheating, overloads, and loss of redundancy. The ability to measure and predict power and cooling capability at the rack enclosure level is required to ensure predictable performance and optimize use of the physical infrastructure resource. This paper describes the principles for achieving power and cooling capacity management.