Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
I am actually wondering if it is correct to even refer to data centers any more. I was speaking to a super computing PhD from Intel and he told me that Google's distributed computing is the state of the art for super computing. While we did not speak about organic rankings this caused me to infer that Google could now have data centers within data centers and that the results could vary based on which hard drives, within a server farm, that either the ranking data comes from or the ranking algorithm (or parts thereof) come from.
With distributed computing, redundancy, a chaotic Internet, and a constantly changing algorithm paired with the physical impossibility of keeping every hard drive in perfect sync it would seem to me that true idea of a static data center is no longer valid.
Or I could be sitting too close to a toxic river.
What do you think?
Google is well over half a million servers at this point - and possibly approaching 1 million or even higher. You're absolutely right. Iif you haven't already done so, it's time to chuck the old mental data center model into the trash.
Beware, this a link to a "Datacenter Watch Thread" from a few years ago where we discussed this a bit.
Trying to monitor the untold number of different ip addresses that G has facing the internet, is a total waste of time & looking at a tiny fraction of IP address using any one of the internet based tools for monitoring ip address is such a small sampling, those too are inaccurate. This is what causes the "Its There", and then the next one "It's Gone, and I now I cannot find it anywhere posts" and back again posts.
Believe the super geek, it would take someone like that to comprehend what G has done, Too much for me, every time I start thinking about it, I get confused and dizzy.