IBM Systems Magazine, Power Systems - April 2017 - 10
Better Service, LOWER COSTS
Why organizations should reconsider their current chargeback systems
magine Mary, Fred and George are gathered for a budget meeting with Ellen,
their company's CIO, to discuss another budget shortfall. Ellen asks, "What caused
this million-dollar shortfall?" George says, "We think it's related to the decision by
accounting to shift one of their major workloads from our Power Systems* platforms to
our VMware tower. We were getting approximately $800,000 in chargeback recoveries
for that application, called the XB app, and those recoveries disappeared when they
is the TCO
analyst in the
Mary adds, "We're behind
in our VMware recoveries too.
It looks like we're headed for a
$230,000 deficit there and we
think it might also be due to the
new XB application."
Then Fred says, "I know they
took the application off, but I haven't seen a reduction in capacity
requirements, so my Power* costs
haven't decreased. I certainly don't
want to be the one explaining to
the other departments why their
chargeback is going up again!"
10 // APRIL 2017 ibmsystemsmag.com
Ellen asked her team to gather
more answers about the XB application shift.
The Staff Meeting
Mary asks Fred, "What did you find
out about the Power situation?"
"We recover our Power costs by
charging for LPARs," says Fred.
"We try to set the LPAR chargeback
rate every year by looking at our
total cost and dividing by the number of LPARs hosted during the
year. The users always complain.
They can't figure out what drives
a need for more LPARs; frankly,
neither can we. That's up to the
architecture and programming
teams. We just host the workloads.
The XB application was using four
LPARs last year and that drove
$800,000 in recoveries. When they
took the application off, it freed up
some capacity on the servers, but
we still need to pay for the servers
and maintenance. It didn't drive
down the peak requirements for
CPU resource either, so we still