There's a lot of "it depends" here. Typically, the lower your "search factor" is, the higher probability that workload pricing might be a fit for you but without a thorough understanding of your use cases it's impossible to advise anything responsibly. That's why I said to engage your local Partner.
Thanks @richgalloway @livehybrid .. appreciating your help with karma points.
Selected @PickleRick 's reply as solution as it gives some more pointers and some more ideas. thanks again.
Thanks @PickleRick @livehybrid @richgalloway ..One more query
Let's assume two Splunk environments, both are having same SVC value.
And one project runs with ingest pricing model whereas the other runs on workload pricing model.
Now, as per your understanding, which one will be cheaper, the ingest model or the workload pricing model?
There's a lot of "it depends" here. Typically, the lower your "search factor" is, the higher probability that workload pricing might be a fit for you but without a thorough understanding of your use cases it's impossible to advise anything responsibly. That's why I said to engage your local Partner.
It's not that simple and we don't have enough information. Have a conversation with your Splunk account team and they will be able to give you the answer that fits your environment.
This is a bit more complicated topic than it seems. You'd do best to consult it with your local Splunk representative and your local Splunk Partner (possibly a higher-tier one).
As the names suggest, with ingest pricing you're paying a fee for the data you're ingesting but you have no limits imposed on the overall architecture of your environment, number of servers, redundamcy, number of sites and so on. So as long as you are within the ingestion size limit you can easily grow your environment if you expand your use cases, add more users and so on.
With the workload pricing you're limited by the size of the main components (indexers and search heads) of your environment but can ingest as much data as the hardware can handle. So it is indeed naturally suited for high-volume, low-search environments. But there are obvious caveats - redundancy (especially multisite clustering) and generally horizontal scaling can quickly kill any savings since you need more indexers. Of course horizontal scaling is also obviously beneficial for search speed but here you're limited by your licensed environment size. To some extent you can mitigate the redundancy requirements by decoupling storage from indexers to smartstore but that's another advanced topic to discuss with your local Splunk staff/partner.
BTW, I moved this thread to a more fitting section (assuming you talked about on-prem Splunk Enterpise).
Hi @inventsekar
Are you consistently using 1500GB or does it fluctuate a lot with an avg of 1500GB? If its fairly consisent then you might still be better on the Ingest pricing under the 'Predictable data volumes' element of the best-fit. It also sounds like you'd only need a 1.5TB ingest license rather than 2TB? This would be a good saving straight away before potential savings of Workload pricing.
As @richgalloway also said, you should be able to have a reasonable conversation about the comparison and how it would affect you with your Splunk account team - they should be familiar with these comparisons and should be able to tailor the conversation to your specific scenario.
🌟 Did this answer help you? If so, please consider:
Your feedback encourages the volunteers in this community to continue contributing
Contact your Splunk account team. They will look at your Splunk usage and will be able to determine if you can save any money by switching to workload pricing.