Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase 123»»»

Give us all the features Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Monday, October 17, 2011 10:51 PM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 AM
Points: 32,781, Visits: 14,942
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Give us all the features






Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1191749
Posted Monday, October 17, 2011 11:02 PM


SSCarpal Tunnel

SSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:20 AM
Points: 4,245, Visits: 3,325
Steve

Situation is, in fact, much more complicated and worse: what you mention are the stated versions and prices. As it is, if you are an account with sufficient weight to throw around, say Shell Oil or Boeing, you can and will negotiate your own deal which will likely include a tailored version and made-to-order support terms and conditions.

That is done by the sales, and if it means that they converted an account from Oracle, there is only one rule: anything goes.

It has nothing to do with engineers in the Servers and Tools Division and in support (ECO).

Sorry.
Post #1191755
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 1:48 AM


SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 11, 2014 2:46 AM
Points: 832, Visits: 327
One other problem is the enforcement. While I like the idea to pay by scale how can unscrupulous customers be forced to pay the right scale?
So buying one core, 2GB license and then deploy on 32 core, 2 TB server? The lockdown has to be in the code which could be buggy or lead to side problems (it needs cycles to check that the underlying hardware hasn't changed etc).
So a simpler licensing model becomes an engineering problem. Nothing that can not be solved but imagine the outcry that MS interrogates your server...
I guess there is no real easy answer to this dilemma.
Post #1191800
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 6:10 AM
UDP Broadcaster

UDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP Broadcaster

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 18, 2014 8:11 AM
Points: 1,497, Visits: 1,820
I've worked at smaller shops where we're clearly not an "Enterprise" size of company and Standard edition would work great for our needs. But you see it especially with 2008 that a lot of the really neat features that'd be fun to learn and experiment with are only in the Enterprise edition. Of course I'd be in favour of having all the features in all the editions (except Express), but even if they just put a bit more thought into which features go into which edition, I'd be happier. Like in your example with TDE, is encryption something that would only be of value to a large enterprise? Or would everyone benefit? Sounds like something that should be "standard" with SQL Server, or even put it all the way back into Express where students learning will get used to encrypting their databases. Resource governor? I'd argue that smaller shops would see much more benefit from it than an enterprise who uses virtual servers to better distribute the load, so standard edition would be a good fit.
Post #1191950
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 6:28 AM
Mr or Mrs. 500

Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 04, 2014 8:42 AM
Points: 598, Visits: 1,504
Not only is Microsoft driving developers toward OSS with server license costs and features restrictions, but the restrictions in various tiers of Visual Studio do the same. Smaller companies in many cases are choosing to use OSS to avoid the whole mess. Which is a shame because many of these tools lack the polish and support of the Microsoft software.
Post #1191965
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 6:38 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 03, 2012 8:15 PM
Points: 31, Visits: 85
I would personally love it if the server came with all the features, and like Express it limited hardware. I would like it even more if the increments, and buy in were a low bar allowing you to scale your environment very granularly.

A good example would be something like:
Each 1GB RAM or core/processor it will use for SQL Server would be $100, and just give me all features, like you said.

Then, also make the lowest buy in remove any restriction on DB size. Realistically, any serious business will need to scale RAM/proc with DB size unless it has low use.

So, I could buy two licenses for $200 and get all the enterprise features, but the hardware allowance would be about the same as SQL Express, so it's not like I could run an airline booking system on it.

Just my two cents,

John
Post #1191974
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 6:50 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 18, 2014 5:41 AM
Points: 25, Visits: 245
This is one reason that I have developers install the SQL Server "Standard" edition from MSDN rather than the "Developer" edition.

The Developer edition has all features enabled, including the Enterprise features.

I once had a developer do something that, performance wise, depended on a feature available only in the Enterprise version, then we got burned a little when we went to deploy in production (which used Standard edition) and that feature wasn't available.

That's one downside to the Developer edition IMHO - unless the developers have a feature matrix handy, they may use something that you don't have in the production environment if they are not careful.
Post #1191984
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 7:47 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 AM
Points: 32,781, Visits: 14,942
Revenant (10/17/2011)


It has nothing to do with engineers in the Servers and Tools Division and in support (ECO).

Sorry.


Not sure I implied it did. It's all sales/marketing, or maybe all marketing/execs. In any case, I'm just making a case for it, not blaming anyone.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1192057
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 7:49 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 AM
Points: 32,781, Visits: 14,942
Knut Boehnert (10/18/2011)
One other problem is the enforcement. While I like the idea to pay by scale how can unscrupulous customers be forced to pay the right scale?
So buying one core, 2GB license and then deploy on 32 core, 2 TB server? The lockdown has to be in the code which could be buggy or lead to side problems (it needs cycles to check that the underlying hardware hasn't changed etc).
So a simpler licensing model becomes an engineering problem. Nothing that can not be solved but imagine the outcry that MS interrogates your server...
I guess there is no real easy answer to this dilemma.


It's already not checked. There isn't a check for per processor licensing now in the code. It's an administrative thing, and we ought to be able to expand it. Plenty of other platforms make the checks or even have "unlock keys" so hardware isn't interrogated, without issues. Not a show stopper, from what I see.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1192060
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 7:50 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 AM
Points: 32,781, Visits: 14,942
a-241529 (10/18/2011)
I would personally love it if the server came with all the features, and like Express it limited hardware. I would like it even more if the increments, and buy in were a low bar allowing you to scale your environment very granularly.

A good example would be something like:
Each 1GB RAM or core/processor it will use for SQL Server would be $100, and just give me all features, like you said.

Then, also make the lowest buy in remove any restriction on DB size. Realistically, any serious business will need to scale RAM/proc with DB size unless it has low use.

So, I could buy two licenses for $200 and get all the enterprise features, but the hardware allowance would be about the same as SQL Express, so it's not like I could run an airline booking system on it.

Just my two cents,

John


Yes!







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1192061
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 123»»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse