TM1 Forum

Currently trying to understand the IBM licensing requirements (Full Capacity, Sub-Capacity, ILMT etc.).
IBM says on their website that sub-capacity licensing only applies to PVU-based software.
Cognos Express isn't PVU based but Install- and AuthorizeD User Based.

Does that mean that if i want to install Cognos Express on a virtual machine that i have to apply Full Capacity counting (count PVUs for every physical processor core), because Cognos Express 10.2.2 has a limit of 1600 PVUs?

FallenCipher wrote:Does that mean that if i want to install Cognos Express on a virtual machine that i have to apply Full Capacity counting (count PVUs for every physical processor core), because Cognos Express 10.2.2 has a limit of 1600 PVUs?

Only your IBM rep knows for sure but that is the way I understand it. BTW, I would never deploy a new installation without IBM's blessing as to the licensing compliance.

FallenCipher wrote:Cognos Express isn't PVU based but Install- and AuthorizeD User Based.

Correct, but if you look at section 3 of the CX 10.2.2 licensing you will see that "IBM Cognos Analytical Server" (ie TM1) is a "Supporting Program" with an entitlement ration of 1,600 PVU's per CX instance. Further, the "Supporting Program" can be deployed as sub-capacity subject to the sub capacity rules.

http://www-03.ibm.com/software/sla/slad ... enDocument

So, the license is quite explicit that sub capapacity licensing rules, eg use of ILMT, DO apply to CX

Question 20 of the CX 10.2.2 FAQ document is not at all clear but suggests the opposite. However, I have been told by IBM that the License document overrides any FAQ.

Sorry to be nerdy about this but it is something I have repeatedly raised with IBM.

The good news is that the Cognos Express licensing may well be revised with the forthcoming release of Planning Analytics Express. Lets cross fingers they come up with something clear and sensible.

tomok wrote:Only your IBM rep knows for sure but that is the way I understand it

Tom, Your IBM sales reps must be better informed than the ones I deal with

I think this may give you some guidance especially when it comes to reading and interpreting IBM licensing documentation.

Thanks for your answers
So if i understand correctly, because the Analytical Server (TM1) has a PVU limit, sub-capacity licensing terms can be applied?
Please correct me if i'm wrong.

So the next thing would be to check if ILMT must be used (if supported by the environment) or if the customer has to manually create those Excel sheets every quarter.
Are these audit reports (be it ILMT or manual Excel sheets) required only for the PVU licenses eg. TM1 Analytical Server or also for the other Authorized User based licenses like Performance Management User, Business Intelligence User etc.?

I'm a little bit lost even after reading all the licensing documents and our contact at IBM only pointed us to license information on the IBM website.

FallenCipher wrote:So if i understand correctly, because the Analytical Server (TM1) has a PVU limit, sub-capacity licensing terms can be applied?

I think that is correct. To me, it is clear in the license document and I have verified that with several IBM contacts.
Note that this applies specifically to CX 10.2.2 and may change with the next (Planning Analytics) release.

FallenCipher wrote:So the next thing would be to check if ILMT must be used (if supported by the environment) or if the customer has to manually create those Excel sheets every quarter. Are these audit reports (be it ILMT or manual Excel sheets) required only for the PVU licenses eg. TM1 Analytical Server or also for the other Authorized User based licenses like Performance Management User, Business Intelligence User etc.?

I agree with you. ILMT must be run if needed, though not if the company has less than 1,000 users. I think it is needed only for the PVU components but not 100% sure.

FallenCipher wrote:I'm a little bit lost even after reading all the licensing documents and our contact at IBM only pointed us to license information on the IBM website.

It is unfortunate that the IBM documents are often unclear and it can frequently be difficult to get a definitive answer from IBM
However, if you fully disclosed the situation to your IBM representative asking for confirmation it was compliant and they refused to comment either way, my feeling is that you would have good grounds to dispute any subsequent claims resulting from audit results. I wouldn't want to rely on that though!