Simon,
There is a slideset that explains the new licensing models. I can present some slides from that next week at the GPFS-UG in Manchester,
To answer your question.
In 4.2.2 The Standard edition of Spectrum Scale continues unchanged.
The Express edition will be removed and all customers with Express will be offered a free uplift to Standard Edition.
The Advanced edition (with Encryption, Cloud Object Tiering, etc.) will be renamed and only that version will have per-TB licensing.
The per-TB is as seen by the NSD server's OS so after hardware RAID, disk mirroring etc. not simply raw disk capacity.
The rules for licensing are that all nodes in a single cluster must have the same license level and at the same license model. ie. in this case all nodes in a cluster per-TB licensed or all nodes per-socket licensed. Multi-Cluster environments can be heterogeneous in this respect. In this case a per-socket cluster can mount a per-TB cluster with no restrictions (but the other way around would (unfortunately) require a set of 'dummy' per-socket client licenses on the nodes of per-TB licensed cluster that is mounting from the per-socket licensed cluster.)
Finally some configurations, most notably ESS will be licensed per physical disk rather than per-TB. This would be independent of the capacity of each disk.
Daniel
| | Dr Daniel Kidger IBM Technical Sales Specialist Software Defined Solution Sales +44-(0)7818 522 266 [email protected] |
----- Original message -----
From: "Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)" <[email protected]>
Sent by: [email protected]
To: gpfsug main discussion list <[email protected]>
Cc:
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Strategies - servers with local SAS disks
Date: Wed, Dec 7, 2016 2:58 PM
I was going to ask about this, I recall it being mentioned about "grandfathering" and also having mixed deployments.Would that mean you could per TB license one set of NSD servers (hosting only 1 FS) that co-existed in a cluster with other traditionally licensed systems?I would see having NSDs with different license models hosting the same FS being problematic, but if it were a different file-system?SimonFrom: <[email protected]> on behalf of Daniel Kidger <[email protected]>
Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, 7 December 2016 at 12:36
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Strategies - servers with local SAS disksThe new volume based licensing option is I agree quite pricey per TB at first sight, but it could make some configuration choice, a lot cheaper than they used to be under the Client:FPO:Server model._______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
_______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
