--- O----------------SNIP-------------------------------------------------Doesn't charging strictly based on CPU usage do something similar?
At least charging on a business metric is understandable to a business user. Ed replied: That is an interesting question, and there are several possible answers.However the answers are not really pertinent as there always exceptions to the rule. I guess I am suggesting there there really is no one way (costing wise) to make everyone happy. Which ends up being charge for total usage is the easy way to go for IBM and the users. What might become interesting is if DB2 came up with a specialized engine and then how do you charge for that? Ed ps: A LONG LONG time ago IBM had a product (memory is dim here) that basically front ended DB2 . We were unaware going in to the product that there was a back end requirement for DB2. Once we found out we immediately stopped looking at the product. It wasn't that we were anti DB2 (and no one was DB2 trained) it was strictly a resource issue and we just could not afford (nor was there available at the time) a faster system than we had. We were also very storage constrained as well and could not increase the memory (we were at max). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
