As reported in the previous blog, Japan Data Center Council (JDCC) developed a comprehensive set of items for evaluating a data center. They took all the necessary international and Japan domestic standards, integrated them, and gave them a Japanese massage”? The standards they considered were Uptime Tier, TIA-942, ASHRAE, IEEE, JEITA (Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association), and FISC (The Center for Financial Industry Information Systems)
The specific factors considered for Japan were as follows:
1. Reliability of power grid—Yearly power loss in Japan is several minutes; in the U.S., 86 minutes; and in the U.K., 68 minutes. Japanese data centers can rely on the commercial grid more, and facilities do not need the elaborate power-failure schemes necessary in the U.S. and the U.K.
2. Earthquake risks—Both Japan and California have the same level of earthquake risk, but Japan’s construction law is much more stringent. If the two areas are compared using PML (Probable Maximum Loss), Japan has less risk of earthquakes.
3. Reliable equipment—Japanese equipment, such as UPS, in general is more reliable and may not require the same level of redundancy as U.S. and U.K. equipment.
|– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –|
|Virtualization: Optimized Power and Cooling to Maximize Benefits|
On the basis of these factors, JDCC developed required and optional sets of evaluation items. The table below summarizes the required items. Note that the building law and the unit to measure the severity of earthquakes are specific to Japan.
|Tier 1||Tier 2||Tier 3||Tier 4||Remarks|
|Building||1||Data center only or multiple use||Multiple use with multiple tenants||Multiple use with multiple tenants||Multiple use with single tenant||Data center use with one tenant|
|2||Earthquake risk based on compliance with PML building law||Less than 20–30%||Less than 20–25%||Less than 10–20%||Less than 10%|
|Comply with standard before 1981||Comply with standard in June 1981||Comply with standard in June 1981||Comply with standard in June 1981 + category I||Earthquake less than 6: weak|
|Comply with standard before 1981||Comply with standard in June 1981||Comply with standard in June 1981 + category II||Comply with standard in June 1981 + category I||Earthquake more than 6: strong|
|Security||Security management level||Server room||Server room||Building and Server room||Site, building, server room, rack|
|Power||1||Intake power redundancy||Single path||Single path||Multiple path
(SNW, main/aux line, loop)
(SNW, main/aux line, loop, ISO27001)
|2||intake to UPS redundancy||Single path||Single path||Multiple paths||Multiple paths|
|3||UPS to PDU redundancy||Single path||Single path||Multiple paths||Multiple paths|
|4||On-site generation redundancy||No req.||N||N||N+1|
|2||Power support redundancy||Single path||Single path||Multiple paths||Multiple paths|
|1||Comm. route & carrier redundancy||One path & single carrier||Multiple paths & single carrier||Multiple paths & multiple carriers||Multiple paths & multiple carriers|
|2||On-premise network redundancy||One path||Multiple paths||Multiple paths||Multiple paths|
|Management||1||On-site or not||No req.||No req.||On-site > 8 hours/day||24×365 on-site|
|2||Management type||Some||Manage-ment program with training||Comply with ISO27001 or FISC||ISO27001 certified or compliance with FISC|
The optional items will be given in the upcoming blog.