Re: PVU - half a license?
A licensing question thread: with IBM's PVU (processor value unit) model, how are multi-core CPUs charged for Informix, and can you pay less by restricting ("affinitizing") IDS to only some cores? Neil Truby answers clearly: processor affinity is irrelevant to IBM Informix licensing — charging is per core under the PVU table, and he notes that under the new rules licensing a quad-core chip costs half what it did before 2007. The rest of the thread drifts into off-topic chat about Power5 vs. Sun Niagara/Opteron/Xeon multi-core hardware, core counts, heat and chip fab sizes, plus a wish for IDS on Solaris x86, with no further licensing conclusions.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
PeterP wrote: > On Feb 1, 7:03 pm, "Neil Truby" <neil.tr...@ardenta.com> wrote: <SNIP> > Affinitize - I can't think of a better word to make up and I used > standard Informix U.S. language with a 'z' (as in initialized) despite > being English for ease of readability in this group. I like 'affine' myself, though the list gave me significant grief a year or so ago when I first used it here. 8^( Art S. Kagel
>From: "Art S. Kagel" <kagel@bloomberg.net> >PeterP wrote: > > On Feb 1, 7:03 pm, "Neil Truby" <neil.tr...@ardenta.com> wrote: ><SNIP> > > > Affinitize - I can't think of a better word to make up and I used > > standard Informix U.S. language with a 'z' (as in initialized) despite > > being English for ease of readability in this group. > >I like 'affine' myself, though the list gave me significant grief a year or >so ago when I first used it here. 8^( > Well, considering that English is a bastardized language, I don't see why not. If truthiness ?sp? can be made a word, why not affine? But back to the topic, if you're running a multicore cpu, should you be charged for 2 cpus or did IBM decide on a formula? And now the 64K question... Suppose you have a new quad core cpu. And you then "affine" 2 to be used for Informix. If IBM does let you pay the lower license, what happens if you decide to "affine" all cores later? I mean from IBM's perspective, its a lose/lose battle. Even if they decide to limit the number of VCPUs on start up after a check on the license brand... Customers would balk... Or are you lying if you order IDS for a single CPU and omit that its a multi-core cpu? _________________________________________________________________ Valentine's Day -- Shop for gifts that spell L-O-V-E at MSN Shopping http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8323,ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=24095&tcode=wlmtagline
"Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gumby@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.157.1170689123.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... > And now the 64K question... Suppose you have a new quad core cpu. And you > then "affine" 2 to be used for Informix. If IBM does let you pay the lower > license, what happens if you decide to "affine" all cores later? > > I mean from IBM's perspective, its a lose/lose battle. Even if they decide > to limit the number of VCPUs on start up after a check on the license > brand... Customers would balk... > > Or are you lying if you order IDS for a single CPU and omit that its a > multi-core cpu? As per my previous mail, it's doesn't matter a toss what you "affine", as processor affinity is an irrelevance to IBM Informix licensing. Interestingly, under IBM's new rules, it now costs half to license a quad-core cpu for IDS than it did on 31/12/06. As IBM itslef has the only popular quad-core processor out, the Power5 processor, perhaps this is enitely deliberate.
I believe that is still true. One major difference between P5 and the competition is the architecture of the CPU and the onboard cache. IBM doubled the onboard cache when they added the second processor. I don't believe they doubled it again when they went to quads, but neither did the competition, so you still get more processing power. On Feb 5, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Tool wrote: > I had heard that Sun's offering of its multi-core CPUs were several > years > behind the Power5. Is this still true today? > > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: >> >>> news:mailman.157.1170689123.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... >>> >>>> And now the 64K question... Suppose you have a new quad core cpu. >>> And you >>>> then "affine" 2 to be used for Informix. If IBM does let you pay >>>> the >>> lower >>>> license, what happens if you decide to "affine" all cores later? >>>> >>>> I mean from IBM's perspective, its a lose/lose battle. Even if they >>> decide >>>> to limit the number of VCPUs on start up after a check on the >>>> license >>>> brand... Customers would balk... >>>> >>>> Or are you lying if you order IDS for a single CPU and omit that >>>> its a >>>> multi-core cpu? >>> >>> As per my previous mail, it's doesn't matter a toss what you >>> "affine", as >>> processor affinity is an irrelevance to IBM Informix licensing. >>> Interestingly, under IBM's new rules, it now costs half to license a >>> quad-core cpu for IDS than it did on 31/12/06. As IBM itslef has >>> the >>> only >>> popular quad-core processor out, the Power5 processor, perhaps >>> this is >>> enitely deliberate. >>> >>> >> Neil, >> >> AMD also offers a quad core as does Intel. Albeit Intel's quad >> core is >> not on the same die. >> And neither is yet at a 45nm components. >> Also AFAIK, Sun has a multi-core offering too. >> >> I haven't priced out a dual socket machine capable of taking a >> quad core >> Intel (Xeon too) CPU. >> That would be 8 cores. Also don't know the cpu speeds... >> >> That's a *lot* of power in a 2U rackable box. >> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on >> your Live.com page. >> http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701 >> > > -- > > * > * -- It has been proven that Chimpanzees and other apes know what > "Thank You" and "Gratitude" mean! > * -- The manager of my manager is my manager -- > * > > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list
>news:mailman.157.1170689123.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... > > > And now the 64K question... Suppose you have a new quad core cpu. And >you > > then "affine" 2 to be used for Informix. If IBM does let you pay the >lower > > license, what happens if you decide to "affine" all cores later? > > > > I mean from IBM's perspective, its a lose/lose battle. Even if they >decide > > to limit the number of VCPUs on start up after a check on the license > > brand... Customers would balk... > > > > Or are you lying if you order IDS for a single CPU and omit that its a > > multi-core cpu? > >As per my previous mail, it's doesn't matter a toss what you "affine", as >processor affinity is an irrelevance to IBM Informix licensing. >Interestingly, under IBM's new rules, it now costs half to license a >quad-core cpu for IDS than it did on 31/12/06. As IBM itslef has the only >popular quad-core processor out, the Power5 processor, perhaps this is >enitely deliberate. > > Neil, AMD also offers a quad core as does Intel. Albeit Intel's quad core is not on the same die. And neither is yet at a 45nm components. Also AFAIK, Sun has a multi-core offering too. I haven't priced out a dual socket machine capable of taking a quad core Intel (Xeon too) CPU. That would be 8 cores. Also don't know the cpu speeds... That's a *lot* of power in a 2U rackable box. _________________________________________________________________ Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your Live.com page. http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701
I had heard that Sun's offering of its multi-core CPUs were several years behind the Power5. Is this still true today? Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > >> news:mailman.157.1170689123.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... >> >> > And now the 64K question... Suppose you have a new quad core cpu. >> And you >> > then "affine" 2 to be used for Informix. If IBM does let you pay the >> lower >> > license, what happens if you decide to "affine" all cores later? >> > >> > I mean from IBM's perspective, its a lose/lose battle. Even if they >> decide >> > to limit the number of VCPUs on start up after a check on the license >> > brand... Customers would balk... >> > >> > Or are you lying if you order IDS for a single CPU and omit that its a >> > multi-core cpu? >> >> As per my previous mail, it's doesn't matter a toss what you "affine", as >> processor affinity is an irrelevance to IBM Informix licensing. >> Interestingly, under IBM's new rules, it now costs half to license a >> quad-core cpu for IDS than it did on 31/12/06. As IBM itslef has the >> only >> popular quad-core processor out, the Power5 processor, perhaps this is >> enitely deliberate. >> >> > Neil, > > AMD also offers a quad core as does Intel. Albeit Intel's quad core is > not on the same die. > And neither is yet at a 45nm components. > Also AFAIK, Sun has a multi-core offering too. > > I haven't priced out a dual socket machine capable of taking a quad core > Intel (Xeon too) CPU. > That would be 8 cores. Also don't know the cpu speeds... > > That's a *lot* of power in a 2U rackable box. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on > your Live.com page. > http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701 > -- * * -- It has been proven that Chimpanzees and other apes know what "Thank You" and "Gratitude" mean! * -- The manager of my manager is my manager -- *
On Feb 5, 4:46 pm, Christine Normile <christinenorm...@mac.com> wrote: > I believe that is still true. One major difference between P5 and > the competition is the architecture of the CPU and the onboard > cache. IBM doubled the onboard cache when they added the second > processor. I don't believe they doubled it again when they went to > quads, but neither did the competition, so you still get more > processing power. > > On Feb 5, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Tool wrote: > > > I had heard that Sun's offering of its multi-core CPUs were several > > years > > behind the Power5. Is this still true today? > > > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > >>>news:mailman.157.1170689123.10648.informix-list@iiug.org... > > >>>> And now the 64K question... Suppose you have a new quad core cpu. > >>> And you > >>>> then "affine" 2 to be used for Informix. If IBM does let you pay > >>>> the > >>> lower > >>>> license, what happens if you decide to "affine" all cores later? > > >>>> I mean from IBM's perspective, its a lose/lose battle. Even if they > >>> decide > >>>> to limit the number of VCPUs on start up after a check on the > >>>> license > >>>> brand... Customers would balk... > > >>>> Or are you lying if you order IDS for a single CPU and omit that > >>>> its a > >>>> multi-core cpu? > > >>> As per my previous mail, it's doesn't matter a toss what you > >>> "affine", as > >>> processor affinity is an irrelevance to IBM Informix licensing. > >>> Interestingly, under IBM's new rules, it now costs half to license a > >>> quad-core cpu for IDS than it did on 31/12/06. As IBM itslef has > >>> the > >>> only > >>> popular quad-core processor out, the Power5 processor, perhaps > >>> this is > >>> enitely deliberate. > > >> Neil, > > >> AMD also offers a quad core as does Intel. Albeit Intel's quad > >> core is > >> not on the same die. > >> And neither is yet at a 45nm components. > >> Also AFAIK, Sun has a multi-core offering too. > > >> I haven't priced out a dual socket machine capable of taking a > >> quad core > >> Intel (Xeon too) CPU. > >> That would be 8 cores. Also don't know the cpu speeds... > > >> That's a *lot* of power in a 2U rackable box. > > >> _________________________________________________________________ > >> Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on > >> your Live.com page. > >>http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701 > > > -- > > > * > > * -- It has been proven that Chimpanzees and other apes know what > > "Thank You" and "Gratitude" mean! > > * -- The manager of my manager is my manager -- > > * > > > _______________________________________________ > > Informix-list mailing list > > Informix-l...@iiug.org > >http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list Most CPU architectures differ in architecture. IBM p5 is really hot one, even literally. They provide high performance, even at the cost of high power consumption and heat dissipation. I think I've read somewhere that next iteration of Power architecture will have decimal arithmetic implemented in hardware. I was surprised seeing that they plan to increase the clock even further. Will we use water cooling again? (I was too young when it was used last time to see it in practice). Plumbers job could become high-tec one :-) Sun's T1 processor based on Niagara architecture may show the way to go in the future. IMHO, the basic reasoning behind that architecture is healthy. Let us not forget that we've seen only first iteration, probably considered as a proof of concept, with crippled FPU performance. I expect that next generation of those CPUs can be very competitive for most uses (current one is for some purposes, for example Web serving). Is anyone that has used T1 with IDS willing to share the experience with us? What about the possibility that IDS for Solaris x86/x64 reappears? I would like to see that one. Opterons and new Xeons are good CPUs. Now you can scale servers with these CPUs to, say, 8 CPUs. I know some of you guys deal with substantially larger servers, but 8 CPUs is well into the mid-level market. Darko Krstic
On Feb 5, 4:24 pm, "Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >From: "Art S. Kagel" <k...@bloomberg.net> > >PeterP wrote: > > > On Feb 1, 7:03 pm, "Neil Truby" <neil.tr...@ardenta.com> wrote: > ><SNIP> > > > > Affinitize - I can't think of a better word to make up and I used > > > standard Informix U.S. language with a 'z' (as in initialized) despite > > > being English for ease of readability in this group. > > >I like 'affine' myself, though the list gave me significant grief a year or > >so ago when I first used it here. 8^( > > Well, considering that English is a bastardized language, I don't see why > not. > If truthiness ?sp? can be made a word, why not affine? > > But back to the topic, if you're running a multicore cpu, should you be > charged for 2 cpus or did IBM decide on a formula? > > And now the 64K question... Suppose you have a new quad core cpu. And you > then "affine" 2 to be used for Informix. If IBM does let you pay the lower > license, what happens if you decide to "affine" all cores later? > > I mean from IBM's perspective, its a lose/lose battle. Even if they decide > to limit the number of VCPUs on start up after a check on the license > brand... Customers would balk... > > Or are you lying if you order IDS for a single CPU and omit that its a > multi-core cpu? > > _________________________________________________________________ > Valentine's Day -- Shop for gifts that spell L-O-V-E at MSN Shoppinghttp://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8323,ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=240... I wouldn't like if the number of VCPUs was limited. Today, with newer/ faster processors, you have to set multiple VCPUs per physical CPU to be able the use all the capacity of modern processors. At least, that is the case with Solaris/SPARC and Linux/Xeons. Darko Krstic
>From: "darko" <darko.krstic@gmail.com> > >Sun's T1 processor based on Niagara architecture may show the way to >go in the future. IMHO, the basic reasoning behind that architecture >is healthy. Let us not forget that we've seen only first iteration, >probably considered as a proof of concept, with crippled FPU >performance. I expect that next generation of those CPUs can be very >competitive for most uses (current one is for some purposes, for >example Web serving). Is anyone that has used T1 with IDS willing to >share the experience with us? > >What about the possibility that IDS for Solaris x86/x64 reappears? I >would like to see that one. Opterons and new Xeons are good CPUs. Now >you can scale servers with these CPUs to, say, 8 CPUs. I know some of >you guys deal with substantially larger servers, but 8 CPUs is well >into the mid-level market. > 8 CPUS or 8 cores? Sun has done some work on multi cores > 8 like 64, but I don't know where they are on getting it in to a product. But imagine 2CPUs with 8 cores each. Not bad. And yes, heat is a problem. IBM and Intel have been working on a ?? K-Dieletric gate which should help in reducing leakage without having to radically change the chip design. Also going to a smaller fab size. Today 90nm in large supply, and 65nm next step. Already 45nm on the horizon. >Darko Krstic > >_______________________________________________ >Informix-list mailing list >Informix-list@iiug.org >http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messenger http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
On Feb 5, 11:42 pm, "Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >From: "darko" <darko.krs...@gmail.com> > > >Sun's T1 processor based on Niagara architecture may show the way to > >go in the future. IMHO, the basic reasoning behind that architecture > >is healthy. Let us not forget that we've seen only first iteration, > >probably considered as a proof of concept, with crippled FPU > >performance. I expect that next generation of those CPUs can be very > >competitive for most uses (current one is for some purposes, for > >example Web serving). Is anyone that has used T1 with IDS willing to > >share the experience with us? > > >What about the possibility that IDS for Solaris x86/x64 reappears? I > >would like to see that one. Opterons and new Xeons are good CPUs. Now > >you can scale servers with these CPUs to, say, 8 CPUs. I know some of > >you guys deal with substantially larger servers, but 8 CPUs is well > >into the mid-level market. > > 8 CPUS or 8 cores? > 8 CPUs as 8 single-core or 4 dual-core ones. In that paragraph I was writing about x86/x64 CPUs. For example, from Sun's site: "Up to 8 AMD Opteron processors". I haven't checked if they mean single or dual core ones, but if it is dual, the total would be 16! Or HP with DL580/ DL585 G4 servers, that can have up to 4 dual-core CPUs. > Sun has done some work on multi cores > 8 like 64, but I don't know where > they are on getting it in to a product. > > But imagine 2CPUs with 8 cores each. Not bad. > Agreed :-) That would be an enterprise server in my neighbourhood :-) Darko Krstic > And yes, heat is a problem. > > IBM and Intel have been working on a ?? K-Dieletric gate which should help > in reducing leakage without having to radically change the chip design. Also > going to a smaller fab size. Today 90nm in large supply, and 65nm next step. > Already 45nm on the horizon. > > >Darko Krstic > > >_______________________________________________ > >Informix-list mailing list > >Informix-l...@iiug.org > >http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list > > _________________________________________________________________ > Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messengerhttp://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=htt...
>From: "darko" <darko.krstic@gmail.com> >8 CPUs as 8 single-core or 4 dual-core ones. In that paragraph I was >writing about x86/x64 CPUs. For example, from Sun's site: "Up to 8 AMD >Opteron processors". I haven't checked if they mean single or dual >core ones, but if it is dual, the total would be 16! Or HP with DL580/ >DL585 G4 servers, that can have up to 4 dual-core CPUs. Uhm, I'd have to go and look at some of the board, but in theory, you could take a dual socket AMD or INTEL board and use their 4 core CPUs. (This will depend on the boards, chipsets, and BIOs) That will give you 8 cores. Today's US pricing puts the 4 core cpus around $1,000 ($USD) a pop. So you're talking about 5-6k for an enterprise class server. More if you want redundant power supplies and hot swappable iSCSI drives and GBs of memory. 2GB per core would mean 16GB at the low end for a screamer. _________________________________________________________________ Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messenger http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline