Thanks! That's what I was looking for. Cheers, Luke.
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 at 15:17 Luke Raimbach <[email protected]> wrote: > The gateway nodes will be mounting an external NFS server as a *client*. > There will be NO NFS exports from these two AFM nodes. > > AFM Local Update filesets will cache the remote NFS exported file systems > (pretend they are ReiserFS not GPFS to make things easier). > > > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 at 15:07 Glen Corneau <[email protected]> wrote: > > The FAQ item does list "sharing data via NFS" as a Server license function > (which is what the gateway node does): > > The IBM Spectrum Scale Server license permits the licensed virtual server > to perform IBM Spectrum Scale management functions such as cluster > configuration manager, quorum node, manager node, and Network Shared Disk > (NSD) server. In addition, the IBM Spectrum Scale Server license permits > the licensed virtual server to *share IBM Spectrum Scale data*directly > through any application, service protocol or method s*uch as Network File > System (NFS)*, Common Internet File System (CIFS), File Transfer Protocol > (FTP), Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), or OpenStack Swift. > > > http://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSFKCN/com.ibm.cluster.gpfs.doc/gpfs_faqs/gpfsclustersfaq.html?view=kc#lic41 > > ------------------ > Glen Corneau > Washington Systems Center - Power Systems > [email protected] > > > > > > From: Luke Raimbach <[email protected]> > To: gpfsug main discussion list <[email protected]> > Date: 11/10/2016 08:37 AM > Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] AFM Licensing > Sent by: [email protected] > ------------------------------ > > > > Hi Kevin, > > Thanks for the response, but that page is still not helpful. > > We will not be exporting any data from the GPFS cluster through the AFM > gateways. Data will be coming from external NFS data sources, through the > gateway nodes INTO the GPFS file systems. > > Reading that licensing page suggests a client license is acceptable in > this situation. There is no mention of AFM explicitly as a function of the > server license. > > Cheers, > Luke. > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 at 14:20 Kevin D Johnson <*[email protected]* > <[email protected]>> wrote: > An AFM gateway node would definitely be a server licensed node. Here are > the working definitions, and yes, this would be true for the various > editions of IBM Spectrum Scale: > > > *http://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/STXKQY_4.2.0/com.ibm.spectrum.scale.v4r2.ins.doc/bl1ins_gpfslicensedesignation.htm* > <http://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/STXKQY_4.2.0/com.ibm.spectrum.scale.v4r2.ins.doc/bl1ins_gpfslicensedesignation.htm> > > *Kevin D. Johnson, MBA, MAFM* > > *Spectrum Computing, Senior Managing Consultant* > > *IBM Certified Deployment Professional - Spectrum Scale V4.1.1IBM > Certified Deployment Professional - Cloud Object Storage V3.8* > *IBM Certified Solution Advisor - Spectrum Computing V1* > > *720.349.6199 - **[email protected]* <[email protected]> > > > > ----- Original message ----- > From: Luke Raimbach <*[email protected]* > <[email protected]>> > Sent by: *[email protected]* > <[email protected]> > To: gpfsug main discussion list <*[email protected]* > <[email protected]>> > Cc: > Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] AFM Licensing > Date: Thu, Nov 10, 2016 9:12 AM > > Thanks for the feature matrix, but it doesn't really say anything about > client / server licenses. Surely you can have clients and servers in all > three flavours - Express, Standard and Advanced. > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 at 12:07 Andrew Beattie <*[email protected]* > <[email protected]>> wrote: > I think you will find that AFM in any flavor is a function of the Server > license, not a client license. > > i've always found this to be a pretty good guide, although you now need to > add Transparent Cloud Tiering into the bottom column > > > > > > *Andrew Beattie* > *Software Defined Storage - IT Specialist* > *Phone: *614-2133-7927 > *E-mail: **[email protected]* <[email protected]> > > > > ----- Original message ----- > From: Luke Raimbach <*[email protected]* > <[email protected]>> > Sent by: *[email protected]* > <[email protected]> > To: gpfsug main discussion list <*[email protected]* > <[email protected]>> > Cc: > Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] AFM Licensing > Date: Thu, Nov 10, 2016 8:22 PM > > HI All, > > I have a tantalisingly interesting question about licensing... > > When installing a couple of AFM gateway nodes into a cluster for data > migration, where the AFM filesets will only ever be local-updates, those > nodes should just require a client license, right? No GPFS data will leave > through those nodes, so I can't see any valid argument for them being > server licensed. > > Anyone want to disagree? > > Cheers, > Luke. > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at *spectrumscale.org* <http://spectrumscale.org/> > *http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss* > <http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss> > > > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at *spectrumscale.org* <http://spectrumscale.org/> > *http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss* > <http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss> > > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at *spectrumscale.org* <http://spectrumscale.org/> > *http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss* > <http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss> > > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at *spectrumscale.org* <http://spectrumscale.org/> > *http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss* > <http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss>*[attachment > "Image.14787856423282.png" deleted by Glen Corneau/Austin/IBM] [attachment > "Image.14787856423283.png" deleted by Glen Corneau/Austin/IBM] [attachment > "Image.14787856423283.png" deleted by Glen Corneau/Austin/IBM] * > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org > http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org > http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
