On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Ken Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote:
> If you have a dual-CPU, hex-core, machine, and all 12 cores are being used > by SQL Server, then you have to buy 12 per-core licenses (previously 2 CPU > licences).**** > > ** > It's reasonable. When that model was set up, who would have forecast 6+ core CPU's? :) > ** > > If you run SQL Server in a VM, and you have 4 virtual cores (e.g. 4 single > core virtual CPUs, or 2 dual core virtual CPUs), then you need to buy 4 > core licences.**** > > ** ** > > Or, if you have a lot of VMs, you licence all the physical cores on the > host using Enterprise Edition, and then you can run unlimited VMs. > And likely that's the most economical way. Does the model run that way for all server components with Enterprise, including the OS? > **** > > ** ** > > Cheers**** > > Ken**** > > ** ** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *mike smith > *Sent:* Tuesday, 26 June 2012 1:19 PM > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: [OT] SQL Server 2012**** > > ** ** > > So on a dual 6 core system that is 12 or 2? I miss seeing what gets > counted. Then there's that option for running 2 virtual cpus per real cpu. > Argh!**** > > ** ** > > Mike**** > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Ken Schaefer <[email protected]> > wrote:**** > > Note that licensing changes for Standard and Enterprise editions to > per-core rather than per-CPU.**** > > **** > > I haven’t yet seen a comparison of our old per-CPU prices for SQL Server > 2008/R2 vs the new per-core prices for 2012. If the new per-core prices are > around 1/4 to 1/6 of the price of the old per-CPU, then I’ll be OK. But I’m > not holding my breath.**** > > **** > > Cheers**** > > Ken**** > > **** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Greg Keogh > *Sent:* Thursday, 21 June 2012 6:37 PM > *To:* 'ozDotNet' > *Subject:* [OT] SQL Server 2012**** > > **** > > I received a box from Singapore today with a single MSDN disc inside, the > June 2012 disc with SQL Server 2012. I’m creating a test virtual Win2008R2 > machine to install it on and see what’s different or exciting. I plan to > import some existing databases and sanity check that my apps work okay with > it. Has anyone got any feelings for SQL 2012 so far? Does it have anything > that might thrill the regular programmer? (as opposed to thrilling someone > building intergalactic networks with the more obscure features) -- Greg** > ** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > -- > Meski**** > > http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv**** > > > "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, > you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills**** > > ** ** > -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills
