This is trivial with respect to physical servers. The crunch is going to come when we have to re-license virtual hosts, where the critical calculation is not the number of cores the server lives on, but the number of cores it might migrate to. Oracle has already played this little game. If a server residing on a virtual host consumes two virtual cores and it's so licensed, no problem - when it migrates to a new host the license migrates with it. If, however, you are obligated to license it for every core it
might migrate to, that's a very different calculation.
The paranoid in me is muttering that it's a means of making the whole thing so messy that management finds the expense of working it all out with local staff is more than outsourcing to a large vendor. I could be wrong about that, but I wouldn't put it past them.
>
The paranoid in me is muttering that it's a means of making the whole thing so messy that management finds the expense of working it all out with local staff is more than outsourcing to a large vendor. I could be wrong about that, but I wouldn't put it past them. Most days I'm 50/50 on whether Microsoft is diabolically brilliant, or categorically insane. Either way, it's tough to figure them out.
virtual hosts, where the critical calculation is not the number of cores the server lives on, but the number of cores it might migrate to. Oracle has already played this little game. If a server residing on a virtual host consumes two virtual cores and it's so licensed, no problem My (second hand) understanding is that Oracle licenses by the physical core at the hypervisor level, even if you provision less to the VM. This is why HDS touts their ability with UCP to provision dedicated cores to an LPAR (not sure if they use that term) so that the hypervisor only has as many cores as you need to provision.