IBM System Storage Ideas Portal
This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM System Storage products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
We have the same problems here as others in this thread : general GPFS client deployment is prevented because
we need to segregate "tenants" (departments / business units / etc.) root accounts
there's too many tenants to allocate a distinct filesystem for each of them
If we could remote-mount filesets into segregated clusters, it would drastically limit the number of NFS/SMB clients, hence improving overall performance of the solution.
Duplicate of 146471
We have a multi-tenant environment with customers with bare metal remote clusters. Being able to use a native GPFS mount of a fileset would make GPFS the clear choice above other NFS solutions. Provisioning many small filesystems to provide data isolation is not tenable.
Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
Brand - Servers and Systems Software
Product family - IBM Spectrum Scale
Product - Spectrum Scale (formerly known as GPFS) - Public RFEs
Component - Product functionality
For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
Brand - Servers and Systems Software
Product family - IBM Spectrum Scale
Product - Spectrum Scale (formerly known as GPFS) - Public RFEs
Component - Technical Foundation
This would help tremendously in our deployments.
It would eliminate the need to separate our data store into distinct file systems just because certain roots are not allowed to view certain data.
SAP is not running in containers and we would like to use native GPFS for SID-directories, but this not possible at the moment because of missing security segregation.
Hi there,
yes - it would be great to have this capability for non Containerized workloads. This would increase the adoption of running the native GPFS client more as there is use cases for 'multi-tenancy' and security segregation in non container scenario - that I would think will still dominate the IT landscape for the next few decades.
Thanks.
As we move towards CSI and containerization, this capability will come along more naturally. Do you still need for this beyond the containerized world?