8 Krypton

FTS Query

Jump to solution

Hi,

I have a query on FTS. It was my understanding that FTS storage was charged as SATA storage but with 5876 Q4 release with SE7,5 you can define the technology for FTS tier as EFD, FC or SATA. Does the charge/costing change as a result of not associating with the lowest performing tier?

This may well be obvious but only noticed this change now so haven't seen anything written on this element yet.

Thanks,

Victor

Labels (1)
0 Kudos
1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

Aran has it , thats the official answer Victor.. 

0 Kudos
11 Replies
8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

In my understanding, FTS tier can be any external storage and that may fit any of EFD, FC of SATA categories.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

hi,

Thanks, I was aware that was the case. This is more of a licensing question I guess then. I will try clarify

FTS external storage could be EFD, FC, SATA but regardless of this when using it with FAST VP it had the lowest performance tier with a tech value (from symfast -sid <sid> list -fp -v ) of N/A. The storage capacity included with FTS was costed the same as including that amount of SATA storage.

You can now change of define the technology type for the FTS tier when creating it with the -technology flag to EFD| FC | SATA. If you change the technology type to FC for example is the FTS storage costed as FC disks and not SATA (i.e. more expensive)?

Thanks,

Victor

0 Kudos
8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

Victor,

the Array controls guide has been updated to include this infomation and how to do it.  However FAST VP for Symmetrix VMAX Theory and Best Practices for Planning and Performance doc on support.emc.com goes into a fair bit of detail on this subject.  More about the why than the how which is why I like this doc.

Have a look in here, hopefully this will answer most of your questions.  As to your initial question Enginuity executes an initial performance discovery of the tier when it is first added to a FAST VP policy an alert will be generated if the performance you specify isn't up to scratch.

8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

I'll look into the licensing and get back to you on that one..  I believe external capacity is not included in the internal costs... but just because I believe doen't make it true.

0 Kudos
8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

Thanks for following up on this Paul! I will indeed follow up in the Best Practice for planning and performance doc on the why, it seems to be a great new feature.

0 Kudos
8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

It would be good to see how FTS is costed/licensed now. I just have a recollection that it is charged at the same price as if you were adding that amount of SATA (regardless of the why type of technology the disks from external array is due to the fact it was always going to be the lowest performing tier) but that may have changed now that you can define the technology for the tier.

I'd confuse the a nation

0 Kudos
8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

I believe the external capacity license costs are indeed similar to SATA license costs.

As Paul pointed out the external tiers can indeed be identified by their drive technology now (EFD, FC, SATA) and this does affect the tiering within policies. The code also performs some rudinmentary response time queries to the external tiers, so we have disk classification in addition to tier response times that assist with FAST VP tiering decisions for external tiers.

8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

Aran has it , thats the official answer Victor.. 

0 Kudos
8 Krypton

Re: FTS Query

Jump to solution

Great, thanks to ye both for the help!

0 Kudos