Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Future of Spectrum Scale support for Centos
>> We don?t have an official statement yet, however I did want to give you >> all an indication of our early thinking on this. >Er yes we do, from an IBM employee, because remember RedHat is now IBM >owned, and the majority of the people making this decision are RedHat >and thus IBM employees. “We” meaning Spectrum Scale development. To reiterate, so far we don’t think this changes Spectrum Scale’s existing policy on CentOS support. Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1992429596] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Future of Spectrum Scale support for Centos
We don’t have an official statement yet, however I did want to give you all an indication of our early thinking on this. Our initial reaction is that this won’t change Scale’s support position on CentOS, as documented in the FAQ: it’s not officially supported, we’ll make best effort to support you where issues are not specific to the distro, but we reserve the right to ask for replication on a supported OS (typically RHEL). In particular, those of you using CentOS will need to pay close attention to the version of the kernel you are running, and ensure that it’s a supported one. We’ll share more as soon as we know it ourselves. Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1774123721] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Licensing costs for data lakes (SSUG follow-up)
I am seeking some help on a topic I know many of you care deeply about: licensing costs I am trying to gather some more information about a request that has come up a couple of times, pricing for “data lakes”. I would like to understand better what people are looking for here. - Is it as simple as “much steeper discounts for very large deployments”? Or is a “data lake” something specific, e.g. a large deployment that is not performance/latency sensitive; a storage pool that is [primarily] HDD; a tier that has specific read/write patterns such as moving entire large datasets in or out; or something else? Bear in mind that if we have special licensing for data lakes, we need a rigorous definition so that both you and we know whether your use of that licensing is compliant. Nobody likes ambiguity in licensing! - Are you expecting pricing to get very flat/discounting to get steep for large deployments? Or a different price tier/structure for “data lakes” if we can rigorously define what one means? Do you agree or disagree with the proposition that if you keep adding storage hardware/capacity, that the software licensing cost should rise in proportion (even if that proportion is much smaller for a “data lake” than for a performance tier)? - Feel free to be creative and imaginative. For example, would you be interested in a low-cost pricing model for storage that is an AFM Home and is _only_ accessed by using AFM to move data in and out of an AFM Cache (probably on the performance tier)? This would be conceptually similar to the way you can now (5.1) use AFM-Object to park data in a cheap object store. - Also feel free to answer questions I didn’t ask… If you prefer to discuss this in Slack rather than email, I started a discussion there a little while ago (please thread your comments!): https://ssug-poweraiug.slack.com/archives/CEVVCEE8M/p1605815075188800 Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1545794140] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Services on DSS/ESS nodes
>> Mixing DSS and ESS in the same cluster is not a supported configuration. > > I know, it means you can never ever migrate your storage from DSS to ESS > without a full backup and restore. Who with any significant amount of > storage is going to want to do that? The logic behind this escapes me, > or perhaps in that scenario IBM might relax the rules for the migration > period. > We do indeed relax the rules temporarily for a migration. The reasoning behind this rule is for support. Many Scale support issues - often the toughest ones - are not about a single node, but about the cluster or network as a whole. So if you have a mix of IBM systems with systems supported by an OEM (this applies to any OEM by the way, not just Lenovo) and a cluster-wide issue, who are you going to call. (Well, in practice you’re going to call IBM and we’ll do our best to help you despite limits on our knowledge of the OEM systems…). --CZ Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_386371469] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Services on DSS/ESS nodes
Jordi wrote: “Both compute clusters join using multicluster setup the storage cluster. There is no need both compute clusters see each other, they only need to see the storage cluster. One of the clusters using the 10G, the other cluster using the IPoIB interface. You need at least three quorum nodes in each compute cluster but if licensing is per drive on the DSS, it is covered.” As a side note: One of the reasons we designed capacity (per Disk or per TB) licensing the way we did was specifically so that you could make this kind of architectural decision on its own merits, without worrying about a licensing penalty. Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1243111775] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Best of spectrum scale
Jonathan, Can I ask you to file an RFE for this? And post the number here so others can vote for it if they wish. I don’t see any reason to defend an error message that is basically a shrug, and the fix should be straightforward (i.e. bail out). However, email threads tend to get lost, whereas RFEs are tracked, managed, and monitored (and there is now a new Systems-wide initiative to report and measure responsiveness.) Thanks, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1291474181] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Developer Edition upgraded to 5.0.5.1
Developer Edition 5.0.5.1 is now available for download Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_647541561] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Quick survey on PTF frequency
Folks, We’re gathering some data on how people consume PTFs for Scale. There is a very brief survey online, and we’d appreciate all responses. No identifying information is collected. Survey: https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/5727746/47520248d614 Thanks, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_884492198] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Beta participants for 5.1.0 for NFS 4.1
Folks, We are looking for one or two users willing to be Beta participants specifically for NFS 4.1. In order to participate, your company has to be willing to sign NDAs and other legal documents - I know that’s always a challenge for some of us! And for complicated reasons, you need to be an end user company not a Business Partner. Sorry. If you are interested please contact Jodi Everdon - jever...@us.ibm.com *off-list*. If you happen to know who your IBM acct rep is and can provide that name to Jodi, that will jump-start the process. Thanks, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1636781822] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Importing a Spectrum Scale a filesystem from 4.2.3 cluster to 5.0.4.3 cluster
On a non-technical note, I wanted to remind everybody that if you’re doing a migration and you need to temporarily run both systems, IBM licensing allows you to do that without ceremony or formality, for up to 90 days under a thing called the “Temporary Additional Use Policy”. You don’t need to register, ask beforehand, etc. Just go ahead. If you need the additional usage for more than 90 days, contact your seller and we’ll figure something out. Regards Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_398516855] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Scale release changelog (was: 5.0.5 available on Fix Central)
> i guess that's what he is looking for ... but Simon has a valid point. > Against what would we count bug fixes, as it is a .0 release ? ;) The previous Mod level? But really, I'd like to know what the users think would be most useful to them. So I've created an RFE and invite people to submit their comments and votes there: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe_ID=142683 Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale 5.0.5.0 is available on FixCentral
Achim, I think the request here (lost in translation?) is for a list of the bugs that 5.0.5.0 addresses. And we're currently looking to see if we can generate that list. Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com On 5/25/20, 7:00 AM, "gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org on behalf of gpfsug-discuss-requ...@spectrumscale.org" wrote: Send gpfsug-discuss mailing list submissions to gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss=DwICAg=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg=obB2s7QQTgU9QMn1708Vpg=vmAWHys4rqj2tGjdDeGEv0DQVLBf8oN-bBlHJc23SQ0=G30K6mkoWpJkWBqltaiUM49Bn_RWnK2Ke9VTThHnUeo= or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to gpfsug-discuss-requ...@spectrumscale.org You can reach the person managing the list at gpfsug-discuss-ow...@spectrumscale.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of gpfsug-discuss digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Spectrum Scale 5.0.5.0 is available on FixCentral (n/t) (scott) 2. Re: Spectrum Scale 5.0.5.0 is available on FixCentral (n/t) (Achim Rehor) 3. Re: Spectrum Scale 5.0.5.0 is available on FixCentral (n/t) (Achim Rehor) -- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 09:57:57 -0400 From: scott To: gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale 5.0.5.0 is available on FixCentral (n/t) Message-ID: <2fde2b2c-3b45-1f63-9653-cf727ceca...@emailhosting.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Is there a bug-fix list? we cant seem to find it - we can just find the new/change features. ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Are you using rsync?
Folks, I’m looking for a handful of volunteers who are using rsync with Scale and willing to jump on a 15 minute call (separate calls for each volunteer, to be clear) to discuss how you are using rsync, what features are essential to you, what its shortcomings are, and anything else you want to share. And if you’re *not* using rsync because of some specific limitation but would like to, I’m also interested in hearing from you. And finally: if you have thoughts on this topic but don’t want to get on the phone, please feel free to email me. Please respond OFF LIST to the email address below. Thanks, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_74924333] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Scale and Linux distros FAQ improvement
Inspired by the RHEL 7.8 compatibility issues (and some earlier incidents too), we have adopted a new practice for the Scale FAQ where we will list new distro releases explicitly with a note indicating if they are not yet supported. In the past we should say things like “7.7.xxx or later” for the supported release level, and not say anything at all about new OS releases until they were supported. That would cause confusion when 7.8 came along, since 7.8 is definitely later than 7.7.xxx... Hopefully this small change will help you with your admin. Regards, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_565114115] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Scale 4.2.3.22 with support for RHEL 7.8 is now on Fix
JAB> Is 5.x supported in 7.8 yet? Support is planned for 5.0.5 later this month, subject to final regression testing now in progress Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1898525102] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Scale 4.2.3.22 with support for RHEL 7.8 is now on Fix Central
Scale 4.2.3.22 with support for RHEL 7.8 is now on Fix Central Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_2020152979] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] support for 7.8 in 5.0.4.4?
Right now the dev/test team is working flat-out to try to get RHEL 7.8 supported with the upcoming 5.0.5 release, expected this month. We haven't yet made a decision about 5.0.4.4. It will depend on what we learn about the changes required to support RHEL 7.8, and whether those are small enough to be worth backporting to 5.0.4.4. Bear in mind that 5.0.4.4 was the last PTF in the 5.0.4 stream, and customers who can update to 5.0.5 are advised to do so. 5.0.5 will be our first Extended Updates release, meaning you can stay there for up to two years while still receiving PTFs including security fixes. There is no additional charge for this: it's included in your existing S As soon as I know more, I'll share it here. Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] wait for mount during gpfs startup (Ulrich Sibiller)
There’s an RFE related to this: RFE 125955 (https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe_ID=125955) I recommend that people add their votes and comments there as well as discussing it here in the UG. Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1027147421] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] S3, S3A & S3n support
From PS K: >Does SS object protocol support S3a and S3n? Can you share some more details of your requirements, use case, etc., either here on the list or privately with me? We’re currently looking at the strategic direction of our S3 support. As Brian said, today it’s strictly the “traditional” S3 protocol, but we are evaluating where to go next. Thanks, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_219535040] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale licensing - important correction
Dean Flanders: > Thanks for the clarification. I have always heard the term "existing > customers" so originally I thought we were fine, > but this is the first time I have seen the term "existing systems". However, > it seems what I said before is mostly correct, > eventually all customers will be forced to capacity based licensing as they > life cycle hardware (even IBM customers). > In addition it seems there is a diminishing number of OEMs that can sell SS > v5, which is what happened in our case when > we wanted to go from v4 to v5 with existing hardware (in our case DDN). So I > strongly encourage organizations to be thinking > of these issues in their long term planning. Again, this isn’t quite correct, and I really want the archive of this thread to be completely correct when people review it in the future. As an existing customer of DDN, the problem GridScaler customers in particular are facing is not Sockets vs. Capacity. It is simply that DDN is not an OEM licensee for Scale V5. So DDN cannot upgrade your GridScaler to V5, *neither on Sockets nor on Capacity*. Then if you go to another supplier for V5, you are a new customer to that supplier. (Some of you out there are, I know, multi-sourcing your Scale systems, so may be an “existing customer” of several Scale suppliers). And again, it is not correct that eventually all customers will be forced to capacity licensing. Those of you on Scale Standard and Scale Advanced software, which are not tied to specific systems or hardware, can continue on those licenses. There is no plan to require those people to migrate. By contrast, OEM licenses (and ESS licenses) were always sold as part of a system and attached to that system -- one of the things that makes those licenses cheaper than software licenses that live forever and float from system to system. It is also not true that there is a “diminishing number of OEMs” selling V5. Everybody that sold V4 has added V5 to their contract, as far as I am aware -- except DDN. And we have added a number of additional OEMs in the past couple of years (some of them quite invisibly as Scale is embedded deep in their solution and they want their own brand front and center) and a couple more big names are in development that I can’t mention until they are ready to announce themselves. We also have a more diverse OEM model: as well as storage vendors that include Scale in a storage solution, we have various embedded vertical solutions, backup solutions, and cloud-based service offerings using Scale. Even Dell is selling a Scale solution now via our OEM Arcastream. Again, DDN and IBM are working together to find a path forward for GridScaler owners to get past this problem, and once again I ask for your patience as we get the details right. Regards Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_50537] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale licensing - important correction
Rob Horton wrote: >I'm not sure what the issue is between DDN and IBM (although I've heard >various rumors) >but I really wish they would sort something out. Yes, it’s a pain. IBM and DDN are trying very hard to work something out, but it’s hard to get all the ‘I’s dotted and ‘T’s crossed with our respective legal and exec reviewers so that when we do say something it will be complete, clear, and final; and not require long, baroque threads for people to figure out where exactly they are… I wish I could say more, but I need to respect the confidentiality of the relationship and the live discussion. In the meantime, I thank you for your patience, and ask that you not believe any rumors you might hear, because whatever they are, they are wrong (or at least incomplete). In this situation, as a wise man once observed, “those who Say don’t Know; those who Know don’t Say”. Regards, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_749317756] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale licensing - important correction
>Now the question, ESS is license per Drive or by capacity? I apologize for the confusion. Within IBM Storage when we say “capacity” licensing we use that as an umbrella term for both Per TB/PB *or* Per Drive (HDD or SSD). This is contrasted with “processor” metrics including Socket and the even older PVU licensing. And yes, we IBMers should be more careful about our tendency to use terminology that nobody else in the world does. (Don’t get me started on terabyte versus tebibyte…). So, for the sake of completeness and for anybody reviewing the thread in the future: * Per Drive is available with ESS, Lenovo DSS, and a number of other OEM solutions*. * Per TB/Per PB is available for software defined storage, including some OEM solutions - basically anywhere where figuring out the number of physical drives is infeasible.** * You can if you wish license ESS with Per TB/PB, for example if you want to have a single pool of licensing across an environment that mixes software-defined, ESS, or public cloud; or if you want to include your ESS licenses in an ELA. This is almost always more expensive than Per Drive, but some customers are willing to pay for the privilege of the flexibility. I hope that helps. *(In some cases the customer may not even know it because the OEM solution is sold as a whole with a bottom line price, and the customer does not see a line item price for Scale. In at least one case, the vertical market solution doesn’t even expose the fact that the storage is provided by Scale.) **(Imagine trying to figure out the “real” number of drives in a high-end storage array that does RAIDing, hides some drives as spares, offers thin provisioning, etc. Or on public cloud where the “drives” are all virtual.) Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1886717044] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale licensing - important correction
> From my understanding existing customers from DDN, Lenovo, etc. that have v4 > with socket based licenses >are not entitled v5 licenses socket licenses. Is that a correct understanding? It is not, and I apologize in advance for the length of this explanation. I want to be precise and as transparent as possible while respecting the confidentiality of our OEM partners and the contracts we have with them, and there is a lot of misinformation out there. The short version is that the same rules apply to DDN, Lenovo, and other OEM systems that apply to IBM ESS. You can update your system in place and keep your existing metric, as long as your vendor can supply you with V5 for that hardware. The update from V4 to V5 is not relevant. The long version: We apply the same standard to our OEM's systems as to our own ESS: they can upgrade their existing customers on their existing OEM systems to V5 and stay on Sockets, *provided* that the OEM has entered into an OEM license for Scale V5 and can supply it, and *provided* that the hardware is still supported by the software stack. But new customers and new OEM systems are all licensed by Capacity. This also applies to IBM's own ESS: you can keep upgrading your old (if hardware is supported) gen 1 ESS on Sockets, but if you replace it with a new ESS, that will come with capacity licenses. (Lenovo may want to chime in about their own GSS customers here, who have Socket licenses, and DSS-G customers, who have Capacity licenses). Existing systems that originally shipped with Socket licenses are "grandfathered in". And of course, if you move from a Lenovo system to an IBM system, or from an IBM system to a Lenovo system, or any other change of suppliers, that new system will come with capacity licenses, simply because it's a new system. If you're replacing an old system running with V4 with a new one running V5 it might look like you are forced to switch to update, but that's not the case: if you replace an old "grandfathered in" system that you had already updated to V5 on Sockets, your new system would *still* come with Capacity licenses - again, because it's a new system. Now where much of the confusion occurs is this: What if your supplier does not provide an update to V5 at all, *neither as Capacity nor Socket licenses*? Then you have no choice: to get to V5, you have to move to a new supplier, and consequently you have to move to Capacity licensing. But once again, it's not that moving from V4 to V5 requires a change of metric; it's moving to a new system from a new supplier. I hope that helps to make things clearer. Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale licensing - important correction
Folks, I need to correct a common misunderstanding that is perpetuated here: > As IBM has completely switched to capacity based licensing in order to use SS > v5 For new customers, Scale is priced Per TB (we also have Per PB licenses now for convenience). This transition was completed in January 2019. And for ESS, it is licensed Per Drive with different prices for HDDs and SSDs. Existing customers with Standard sockets can remain on and continue to buy more Standard sockets. There is no plan to end that entitlement. The same applies to customers with Advanced sockets who want to continue with Advanced. In both cases you can upgrade from V4.2 to V5.0 without changing your license metric. This licensing change is not connected to the migration from V4 to V5. However, I do see a lot of confusion around this point, including from my IBM colleagues, possibly because both transitions occurred around roughly the same time period. Regards, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS 5 and supported rhel OS
So far we have not revisited the EOS date for 4.2.3, but I would not rule it out entirely if the lockdown continues well into the summer. If we did, the next likely EOS date would be April 30th. Even if we do postpone the date for 4.2.3, keep two other dates in mind for planning: - RHEL 6 support is coming to an end in November. We won't support Scale with RHEL 6 once Red Hat stops supporting RHEL 6 - RHEL 7 will be supported with 5.0.5, but not "5.next", the release scheduled for the second half of 2020. So you'll need to plan to adopt RHEL 8 before upgrading to Scale "5.next" As much as possible we are going to try to stick to our release cadence of twice a year even through these difficulties, including designating 5.0.5 for Extended Updates. "Keep Calm and Scale Out". Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com Message: 2 Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:09:12 + From: Jonathan Buzzard To: gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS 5 and supported rhel OS Message-ID: <91d02fd3-2af7-5880-e1f2-aaf9b1f80...@strath.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed On 19/02/2020 23:34, Renata Maria Dart wrote: > Hi, I understand gpfs 4.2.3 is end of support this coming September. A planning question at this stage. Do IBM intend to hold to this date or is/could there be a relaxation due to COVID-19? Basically I was planning to do the upgrade this summer, but what with working from home I am less keen to do a a 4.2.3 to 5.x upgrade while not on hand to the actual hardware. Obviously if we have to we have to, just want to know where we stand. JAB. -- Jonathan A. Buzzard Tel: +44141-5483420 HPC System Administrator, ARCHIE-WeSt. University of Strathclyde, John Anderson Building, Glasgow. G4 0NG -- ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS 5 and supported rhel OS (Ken Atkinson)
Ken wrote: > It may be that some HPC users "have to" > reverify the results of their computations as being exactly the same as a > previous software stack and that is not a minor task. Any change may > require this verification process. How deep does “any change” go? Mod level? PTF? Efix? OS errata? Many of our enterprise customers also have validation requirements, although not as strict as typical HPC users e.g. they require some level of testing if they take a Mod but not a PTF. Mind you, with more HPC-like workloads showing up in the enterprise, that too might change… Thanks, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale & Spectrum Discover (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_510537050] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS 5 and supported rhel OS
To reiterate what’s been said on this thread, and to reaffirm the official IBM position: * Scale 4.2 reaches EOS in September 2020, and RHEL6 not long after. In fact, the reason we have postponed 4.2 EOS for so long is precisely because it is the last Scale release to support RHEL6, and we decided that we should support a version of Scale essentially as long as RHEL6 is supported. * You can purchase Extended Support for both Scale 4.2 and RHEL6, but (as Jonathan said) you need to look closely at what you are getting from both sides. For Scale, do not expect any fixes after EOS (unless something like a truly critical security issue with no workaround arises). * There is no possibility of IBM supporting Scale 5.0 on RHEL6. I want to make this as clear as I possibly can so that people can focus on feasible alternatives, rather than lose precious time asking for a change to this plan and waiting on a response that will absolutely, definitely be No. I would like to add: In general, in the future the “span” of the Scale/RHEL matrix is going to get tighter than it perhaps has been in the past. You should anticipate that broadly speaking, we’re not going to support Scale on out-of-support OS versions; and we’re not going to test out-of-support (or soon-to-be out-of-support) Scale on new OS versions. The impact of this will be mitigated by our introduction of EUS releases, starting with 5.0.5, which will allow you to stay on a Scale release across multiple OS releases; and the combination of Scale EUS and RHEL EUS will allow you to stay on a stable environment for a long time. EUS for Scale is no-charge, it is included as a standard part of your S Regards, Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale & Spectrum Discover (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_2106701756] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Spectrum Scale 5.0.5 Beta participation
We are accepting nominations for IBM Spectrum Scale 5.0.5 Beta participation here: https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/5356255/ee853c3af96a The Beta begins in mid-February. Please note that you’ll need your IBM account rep to nominate you. Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale & Spectrum Discover (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Scale Developer Edition free for non-production use now available
In response to various questions… Yes, the wrong file was originally linked. It should be fixed now. Yes, you can definitely use this edition in your test labs. We want to make it as easy as possible for you to experiment with new features, config changes, and releases so that you can adopt them with confidence, and discover problems in the lab not production. No, we do not plan at this time to backport Developer Edition to earlier Scale releases. If you are having problems with access to the download, please use the Contact links on the Marketplace page, including this one for IBMid issues: https://www.ibm.com/ibmid/myibm/help/us/helpdesk.html. The Scale dev and offering management team don’t have any control over the website or download process (other than providing the file itself for download) or the authentication process, and we’re just going to contact the same people via the same links… Regards Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale & Spectrum Discover (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com [signature_1522411740] ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
[gpfsug-discuss] Scale Developer Edition free for non-production use now available
Spectrum Scale Developer Edition is now available for free download on the IBM Marketplace: https://www.ibm.com/us-en/marketplace/scale-out-file-and-object-storage This is full-function DME, no time restrictions, limited to 12TB per cluster. NO production use or support! It’s likely that some people entirely new to Scale will find their way here to the user group Slack channel and mailing list, so I thank you in advance for making them welcome, and letting them know about the wealth of online information for Scale, including the email address sc...@us.ibm.com Carl Zetie Program Director Offering Management Spectrum Scale & Spectrum Discover (919) 473 3318 ][ Research Triangle Park ca...@us.ibm.com ___ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
