This has been our experience too. We've been running TSM for six years, and in that time, the number of systems has gone up 4x, the number of CPUs has gone up about 10x, and the amount of primary backup/archive data has gone up 50x. We're sticking with the core-based PVU licensing as long as we can. :)
-- Skylar Thompson (skyl...@u.washington.edu) -- Genome Sciences Department, System Administrator -- Foege Building S046, (206)-685-7354 -- University of Washington School of Medicine On 07/16/12 05:23 AM, BEYERS Kurt wrote:
Hi Ian, As I understood IBM will make an different offer for each customer so that there is a (short term) profit. However on the long term you will pay more to IBM imho since data will grow faster than the number of cores in your servers. After all hardware replacement is done once every 4 years or later on. The only advantage is that the capacity based licensing is more easy to calculate than the PVU based. Regards, Kurt -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] Namens Ian Smith Verzonden: maandag 16 juli 2012 13:13 Aan: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Onderwerp: Re: [ADSM-L] Moving to TSM Capacity based licensing from PVU - experiences Hi, We are in the midst of discussions on moving to capacity-based licensing from the standard PVU-based method for our site. We have a large number of clients ( licensed via TSM-EE, TDP agents, and on client-device basis ) and around 1PB of primary pool data. As I understand it, there is no published metric for the conversion from PVU to per TB licensing so I would be really interested and grateful if anyone would like to share their experiences of that conversion in a private email to me. Many thanks in advance. Ian Smith Oxford University England *** Disclaimer *** Vlaamse Radio- en Televisieomroeporganisatie Auguste Reyerslaan 52, 1043 Brussel nv van publiek recht BTW BE 0244.142.664 RPR Brussel http://www.vrt.be/gebruiksvoorwaarden
