[committee] [tech] Auction TOMORROW for UPS

[matches at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au]

I also endorse this
[SZM]

Quoting Daniel Axtens <danielax at gmail.com>:

>> Hi Daniel
>>
>> That is a point to consider but we have a dinky little UPS on each CPU box
>> (only, not screens) here and the main benefit is carrying the gear  
>> across very
>> short disturbances. The UPS jumps in, runs on battery for it's obligatory 5
>> seconds until the power looks stable again, and returns the supply to mains.
>>
>> What is saves in hassle more than compensates for the little bit of power it
>> uses. I think if the Ross' bid can secure the UPSes and extended  
>> battery boxes
>> (buyers for them alone are less likely) then, even if only the main unit was
>> re-stocked with batteries (and the other left unused) the 6 minute run time
>> will cover the main situation of very short disturbances.
>>
>> We've set up nut here (tho I haven't done that yet for the replacement
>> CompuGuard 650 I purchased the other day) so the system runs 90 seconds on
>> battery and shuts down. Nut can also communicate across multiple machines
>> running on one (or several) UPS to sequentially shut down systems.  
>> I selected
>> 90 seconds because it was more about preserving file system integrity (and
>> file recovery from vim etc) than trying to run the system across the outage.
>> This gets back to your original lifespan question; it's not about uprecords
>> for us.
>>
>> For the UPS' sake, running only for 90 seconds doesn't take the battery
>> anywhere near to the UPS' "discharged battery" threshold which, for these
>> small SLA batteries, kills them without too many cycles to flat. I  
>> suspect the
>> UPS manufactures underrate the battery and are relying on the idea that most
>> power losses are short.
>
> This is one of the best thought-out responses I've received to  
> anything this year. Thanks Harry.
>
> I've also been told on IRC that we do have machines dying due to  
> power issues, and that, to [BOB] at least, not having to rebuild his  
> screen session is worth $1000.
>
> I now think the project is one that should be done with the  
> part-member/part-club structure used for motsugo, and countless  
> other projects. (So, Bob, I'm sure that you'll be the first person  
> lining up to donate!)
>
> I endorse the motion to purchase.
>
> [DJA]
>
>