?
Solved

Help with SQL Server licensing

Posted on 2012-03-22
10
Medium Priority
?
511 Views
Last Modified: 2012-06-27
Hi Experts,

Really struggling to get my head round all this and my boss is needing a solution!

We have an access front end, with tables currently on a XP pro machine running SQL express.
Our database is currently 1gb large and can be used constantly for up to 15 people.

We are investing in a new server running Windows Server 2008 R2 with a "Intel Xeon E3-1220, 4C/4T, 3.10GHz, 8M Cache, 80W TDP, Turbo"

Using this information, roughly how much will a full version of SQL server cost?
I don't understand CALS in the slightest. If I know I could have 15 people accessing it at any one time, I understand I need 15 CALS - How much is one CAL on top of the license for SQL server?

Any help would be greatly appreciated. It seems there's just short of 16 billion different licensing options and I can't get my head round any of it.
0
Comment
Question by:INHOUSERES
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 4
  • 4
  • 2
10 Comments
 
LVL 8

Expert Comment

by:Bill
ID: 37752383
Hello,

Yes MS has many licensing programs out there. First off if your running express I would assume that MS SQL 2008 Standard will suite your needs. if that is the case then you have too options. a processer license which covers unlimited connections. or you buy just the SQL server software and then buy CALs MSRP are about $150 a CAL and SQL is about $800 and a processer licensing version is about $6,500 to $7,000. So for 15 users I wouldent reccomend that
0
 
LVL 5

Author Comment

by:INHOUSERES
ID: 37752495
Hi TSGITDept,

Thanks for the reply.

I just found this via t'internet:

The workhorse SQL Server 2012 Standard Edition remains the staple of the product line for serious database applications. It can handle up to 16 cores with an unlimited amount of RAM. The major change in licensing from SQL Server 2008 to SQL Server 2012 is that a per core option is now available for the Standard Edition. This means that you have two choices: purchase per core licenses at $1,793 or purchase a server license at $898 and client access licenses at $209 per client.

$898 + (15 * $209)  = $3135
$1793 + $0 = $1793

I'm now even more confused. If you have more than 5 people accessing the SQL (which I imagine 100% of companies that need to buy SQL server would have), CAL licensing looks utterly UTTERLY pointless.

I can't have got this right... surely?
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:slakic
ID: 37752772
You have to be clear about one thing, and that is the licence is just a piece of paper, as a proof that you own what you're using.

Having said that, for core licensing, if you have a server with 4 cores, that means, if you want to purchase a processor license, you have to pay

$1793 x 4 = 7172 plus $800 for server licence = $7972

but if you purchase 15 device CAL's (for every concurrent connection), that would be

$209 x 15 = $3135 plus $800 for server licence = $3935

The border between buying processor license and CAL is 30, which means, if you have less than 30 users accessing, then it's cheaper to purchase CAL's, rather than a processor license.

Note that you have to buy a license for every core that you SQL server might use, there's no limit depending on the license of how many cores can you utilise, so in your case, you would have to pay for 4 cores.
0
Get your Conversational Ransomware Defense e‑book

This e-book gives you an insight into the ransomware threat and reviews the fundamentals of top-notch ransomware preparedness and recovery. To help you protect yourself and your organization. The initial infection may be inevitable, so the best protection is to be fully prepared.

 
LVL 8

Expert Comment

by:Bill
ID: 37752820
that was 7,000 not 1,700
0
 
LVL 5

Author Comment

by:INHOUSERES
ID: 37752870
Thanks Slakic,

That's beginning to make more sense now.
I'm a software based kinda guy, I know a little bit about hardware in order to buy a desktop computer/laptop and not get ripped off, but In know nothing about the server stuff.

So the processor that I posted up there has 4 cores. That makes much more sense now.

Looking back at the size of the database and the limitations of Express, what is $4000 going to improve for me?
It's not a massive database (1gb can't be big), and it's not dealing with masses of queries per second.
Is there a way I can find out if my database speed or my users are affected by this limitation of 1GB ram?

We're only looking into this because we *think* it might help.
Seeing as it's going to be a $4000 decision, I need to get some results to prove if it will be better.
0
 
LVL 6

Accepted Solution

by:
slakic earned 1500 total points
ID: 37752905
You have to keep in mind that all data sets and query results which would normally be in RAM will be paged to disk, which could pose a performance issue. Also, I think the size of the database cannot go over 4 GB on disk.

I would say go for Express, you can upgrade anytime, if you feel that performance is dropping significantly because of limitation of Express.
0
 
LVL 5

Author Comment

by:INHOUSERES
ID: 37752974
Thanks slakic,

It does seem that Express is the way to go.
I don't suppose there is a way I can run a performance test on the database to see if the performance is hindered by the limitations?

We've looked into 10,000 rpm hard drives. Could this make a big difference?
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:slakic
ID: 37753946
Of course it could, having faster hard drives means shorter time of reads/writes, but also good performance improvement would be to put database and log files on different hard drives, well, to different spindles, because databases are very  I/O intensive, and separating writing log files from records in database is always a good practice.
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:slakic
ID: 37753978
Have a look at http://www.sqlstress.com
0
 
LVL 5

Author Comment

by:INHOUSERES
ID: 37756368
Thanks buddy,


I've got enough information here to save the company $4000.
It looks like it might be necessary in future, but we're now specing our server with 10,000 rpm drives so we can get a little bit more out of SQL Express before we upgrade.

Cheers.
0

Featured Post

Learn Veeam advantages over legacy backup

Every day, more and more legacy backup customers switch to Veeam. Technologies designed for the client-server era cannot restore any IT service running in the hybrid cloud within seconds. Learn top Veeam advantages over legacy backup and get Veeam for the price of your renewal

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

If you’re involved with your company’s wide area network (WAN), you’ve probably heard about SD-WANs. They’re the “boy wonder” of networking, ostensibly allowing companies to replace expensive MPLS lines with low-cost Internet access. But, are they …
When trying to connect from SSMS v17.x to a SQL Server Integration Services 2016 instance or previous version, you get the error “Connecting to the Integration Services service on the computer failed with the following error: 'The specified service …
With Secure Portal Encryption, the recipient is sent a link to their email address directing them to the email laundry delivery page. From there, the recipient will be required to enter a user name and password to enter the page. Once the recipient …
Add bar graphs to Access queries using Unicode block characters. Graphs appear on every record in the color you want. Give life to numbers. Hopes this gives you ideas on visualizing your data in new ways ~ Create a calculated field in a query: …
Suggested Courses

649 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question