Re: Processor Based License Model
From: Dr. Dweeb (dr_at_dweeb.com)
Date: 05/13/04
- Next message: Dr. Dweeb: "Re: Processor Based License Model"
- Previous message: John Smith: "Re: This is why HP needs to advertise VMS and increase its sales"
- In reply to: Chuck Chopp: "Re: Processor Based License Model"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 04:17:09 +0200
Chuck Chopp wrote:
> Barry Treahy, Jr. wrote:
>
>> I do know that for PC software, we're already had problems. We have
>> engineering design software that is ONLY available for Windows and
>> they crucify you with a major license increase if you run on multiple
>> processors. Well guess what the Intel P4 with HT looks like to
>> Windows, and to the software running on it? You guessed it!
>> I agree with you that the licensing models must be rethought, but I'm
>> sure that in the eyes of the CA's, Oracle's, HP's, etc., that would
>> mean they are being asked to 'leave money on the table' no matter how
>> short-sighted their perspective might actually be... I can't see
>> them making that choice quickly, or at all...
>
> And the really irritating aspect of a hyperthreading CPU appearing as
> a dual CPU SMP system under Windows is that you don't necessarily get
> the same performance increase as compared to having 2 separate CPUs
> with one core each. If the on-board cache isn't increased and some
> of the other issues associated with memory access aren't resolved,
> you'll get a mult-core CPU that can't compete performance-wise with
> separate CPUs. Things like NUMA come to mind, along with instruction
> pre-fetching, pipelining, etc....
>
> Maybe for databases what we really need is a license that permits X
> number of transactions per seccond to be processed by the database.
> If you run it on hardware that is insufficient to process the
> licensed TPS volume, that's fine, you didn't under buy on your
> licensing and can perform a hardware upgrade w/o increasing your
> licensing costs for the database. But, if you do upgrade your
> hardware and the hardware could now have the database executing at a
> TPS rating higher than you are licensed for, the database would
> simply throttle itself back to your licensed TPS limit.
>
Transactions are ephemeral objects, few of which are the same. A complete
waste of time as a value for licensing purposes.
Dr. Dweeb.
> Wouldn't this make more sense for database software licensing? It
> would certainly allow you to have a large SMP server and put a
> database application on it that doesn't monopolize the server's
> resources while not also paying through the nose to run that database
> application on that large server.
>
> And, there's even other ways around the multiple CPU issue on Windows
> and Linux systems, too. Youd could implement server virtualization
> software like VMware [most likely GSX/ESX server] where each virtual
> machine only has a single CPU regardless of how many CPUs the host
> system has. Then, you could distribute your database across those
> multiple virtual machines and run them in a "clustered" or
> "distributed" mode and thus bypass the license fees associated with
> multiple CPUs per system.
- Next message: Dr. Dweeb: "Re: Processor Based License Model"
- Previous message: John Smith: "Re: This is why HP needs to advertise VMS and increase its sales"
- In reply to: Chuck Chopp: "Re: Processor Based License Model"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
