May 24, 2017 at 5:01 pm
I've googled A LOT, and I just cant seem to get the right answer, I really hope this community can help me out, before we have our MS audit;
If I have 2 standard instances on one server, do I only need to pay for one license ?
If I have 2 instances of SQL on one server, one is enterprise edition and one is standard, what do I pay for ? (the highest one, which would be enterprise, or would I have to pay for 2 licenses (standard and enterprise) ?
If I have a 2012, a 2014, and a 2016 standard instance on one server, do I pay for 1 license...the 2016 one ?....or pay all 3 ?
If I have 2016 SQL Enterprise installed, but services are not turned on, I will not be charged, right ?
I really would appreciate the communities insight, thank you.
May 25, 2017 at 2:45 am
The only one of those I can definitely answer is the last. If you have SQL Server installed, it must be licensed. If you're not using it, it's your choice.
For the first, two Standard Edition installs, I suspect both need licensing if you're using Server + CAL licenses, but speak to you Microsoft licensing rep.
For the others, speak to your Microsoft licensing rep.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
May 25, 2017 at 3:12 am
If you have a dedicated physical server, then the licensing is tied to the number of cores.
You can have multiple licenses on the server, from many reasons. You should pay licensing based on the cores of your server.
If you have Enterpirse and Standard, then you'll be charged for the Enterprise, logically.
I've met a situation where the client had to decrease the used CPUs for his Enterprise edition because it was expensive for him. So he set a CPU affinity to use less cpus than there were on the box. It's a deal with the Microsoft licensing rep.
Image a situation you have a 12 core server, and you've installed 3 instances. It's illogical to pay licensing for 36.
For the virtual machines it's different.
Igor Micev,My blog: www.igormicev.com
May 25, 2017 at 3:38 am
Igor Micev - Thursday, May 25, 2017 3:12 AMIf you have a dedicated physical server, then the licensing is tied to the number of cores..
Keep in mind that there's core-based licensing and server-and-CAL licensing. For core-based, all the cores need to be licensed and the number of instances doesn't matter, but I don't know how server-and-CAL works for multiple instances.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
May 25, 2017 at 3:47 am
GilaMonster - Thursday, May 25, 2017 3:38 AMIgor Micev - Thursday, May 25, 2017 3:12 AMIf you have a dedicated physical server, then the licensing is tied to the number of cores..Keep in mind that there's core-based licensing and server-and-CAL licensing. For core-based, all the cores need to be licensed and the number of instances doesn't matter, but I don't know how server-and-CAL works for multiple instances.
Yes, Agree.
For CALs I don't know too.
Igor Micev,My blog: www.igormicev.com
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply