®
ENERGY STAR

Data Center Storage
Version 1.0
Stakeholder Webinar
Supplementary Data Set Development
23 February 2011

Agenda• Recap EPA Announcement re: SecondaryData• Opportunity for Discussion & Comments fromIndustry• Review Timeline & Next StepsObjective• Augment current data set (17 products, 42data points) with a 2nd round of tests, using aconsistent test method.

Taxonomy of Interest• Online Systems• SNIA Taxonomy Categories 2, 3, 4

• Removable Media Libraries• SNIA Taxonomy Categories 2, 3, 4

Single-Variable Changes• Further understand relationship between
hardware/software configuration and energy
performance in both active and idle states.
• Narrow focus to key variables from Round 1:• Hard Disk Drive (HDD) selection (e.g., capacity vs.
performance)• Reliability-Availability-Serviceability (RAS) features(e.g., single vs. redundant controllers, RAID level)• Small Form Factor (SFF) and Solid State Disk (SSD)
drive technologies• Software features ON/OFF• Other variables as resources permit

Areas of Interest• Variation Across Taxonomy Categories• Assess performance of Online Group 2, Removable
Media Library Group 2, or Removable Media LibraryGroup 4 systems, for which no data has been
submitted to date.
• Compare Online Group 3 & 4 systems, Removable
Media Group 2, 3, and 4 systems.

• Effect of Drive Quantity• Change HDD quantity versus a fixed number ofcontrollers on an otherwise equivalent system.
• Preferably vary drive quantity in multiples of 2 (e.g.,test with N, 2N, and 4N, 8N drives).

Areas of Interest• Effect of Drive Technology• Drive speed (e.g., 7200 vs. 15k RPM) and Small
Form Factor (SFF) / Solid State Drives (SSD) versus
traditional drive technologies on an otherwise
equivalent system.

• Effect of RAS Features (hardware or software)• RAS features vs. lack of RAS features on anotherwise equivalent system.

• Isolation of Controller vs. Drawer PSUs
• Measure loading of individual power supplies (orgroups of power supplies) within a system.

Product Family Approaches• Continue to pursue a meaningful Product Family
definition to ensure program integrity withminimal test burden• Use data to validate one of the following
possibilities:• Book-ending: Test ‘smallest’ and ‘largest’
configuration (based on one or more key variables)
as boundaries for ENERGY STAR qualification• N and xN: Test a given configuration with N and 2N(or xN) of a key variable, then extrapolatequalification to smaller or larger configurations

Simulation Data
• EPA will consider simulated (modeled) data
to reduce test burden:• Simulators must be robust and capable ofidentifying meaningful differences in energy
performance• If simulated data is provided, all tested systems
should be run through the simulator to assess
simulator accuracy

Discussion

Questions?

Timeline• PSU data may still be submitted forconsideration• Additional test or simulator data received byApril 22, 2011 will be considered by EPA• Data will be analyzed and results in late April.
EPA will make anonymous data available tostakeholders for concurrent analysis• The 2nd draft product specification will be
distributed for comment in May

Contact Information• Una Song (US EPA)
– song.una@epa.gov // 202.343.9024• RJ Meyers (US EPA)
– meyers.robert@epa.gov // 202.343.9923• Steve Pantano (ICF)– spantano@icfi.com // 202.862.1551• Al Thomason (TBWC)– thomasonw@gmail.com

More Info:
http://www.energystar.gov/NewSpecs
12