I've had a couple of customers look at capacity-based licensing, ditto what the other folks said. IBM will make a different offer to each customer, which supposedly takes into account the conversion of your existing licenses.
I have one customer who only keeps their backups 2 weeks (really, really short), but they back up over 250 systems, lots of TDP for SQL agent, total of only about 80 TB in primary storage. They definitely would come out better switching to capacity-based. I have another customer who backs up less than 100 clients, but keeps everything 6 months, they are over 300 TB primary storage. Better off sticking with PVU-based. However, some customers may also come out better with capacity-based licensing, because it includes all the TDP's and TSM for VE; some might use it as a quick and dirty way to pick up more products with no additional cost. So you just have to look at your own circumstances and figure out where the growth is; if you are already at 1 PB, my guess is you will NOT come out better going to the capacity-based license, but can't say for sure. W -----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Ian Smith Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 7:13 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: 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
