Number of periods for a model should not be part of ALM

[karank]

There has been numerous occasions where by my clients have asked me to reduce time duration for DEV and UAT Models . For eg. i might have 20 Yrs forecast in prod but only  5 yrs in DEV and UAT . With number of periods being part of ALM it cannot be achieved . 

It will be great if we can take it out of ALM structural change if possible 

[Misbah]

@karank 

Biggest advantage of doing this is that It will help optimizing the models within the workspace & the good amount of space can be released immediately in Dev & UAT Environments. Any other advantages that you can think of?

[karank]

@Misbah you have pretty much highlighted the single biggest advantage which is space optimisation . I get lot of clients asking me why is my DEV and UAT space same as prod ? 

Most of the time they are not happy paying same money as production space for Dev space. 

[Misbah]

@karank 

This will be nice if the number of periods (past & future) can be taken out of ALM. However you brought another topic of having all three environments having the same size - which shouldn't be the case.

Dev environment shouldn't be as big as UAT or Prod, it is recommended that it should not be more than 5 GBs even if UAT/Prod model is over 100 GB. But I agree with you that UAT environment being similar in size with Prod makes a huge impact on the overall space allocation. One way to handle it is by implementing this idea.  hence I am upvoting for it

Thanks

Misbah