Licensing is really complex, but as long as you know these seven rules, you can go a long way:. If you query it, you have to license it. “It” means the Windows environment – all of the processor cores that Windows sees. (Things get a little weirder.).
Offloading a backup or a DBCC is considered querying. If you license it, and you pay Software Assurance, you get exactly one free standby server of equivalent size. (Standby means you’re not querying it.). Standard Edition costs about $2k USD per core, but caps out at 16 cores and 128GB RAM (for SQL 2014, or 64GB for 2012).
SQL Server 2016 Licensing. SQL Server 2016 delivers mission. A user would need a SQL Server 2012 CAL or a. The Web Edition is offered only to.
Enterprise Edition costs about $7k USD per core. Software Assurance is an additional annual fee that gives you free upgrades as long as you keep paying for it. Then to learn more, get the 2014 Licensing Guide on the right side of the. Got a question not answered by these rules? Head over to the Want help?
Talk to Brent for free. Brent, I was thinking that multiple instances on the same physical server could make sense in some circumstances where we want to split the RAM between instances or if we have a requirement for different service pack levels, or if we want to limit elevated user permissions so that if an application account needs to be elevated during an installation, it can’t modify unrelated databases contained in another instance. The other use might be a three node cluster where one node is passive but we want all FCIs to be able to run on all nodes for manageability. I was not clear on the licensing if all physical nodes are licensed once. Thomas – if I was a Microsoft lawyer, I’d say: Me: “So are you running DBCC on your production databases?” Thomas: “No.” Me: “So what’s this daily task where you restore databases onto your desktop, run DBCC, send yourself an email if it succeeds, otherwise just delete the database and do it again tomorrow?” Thomas: “Uh, a fun experiment?” That’s not going to fly very far – no more than if you restored the production databases somewhere else, ran sales reports to make sure you were still on track to hit budget, and then sent yourself confirmation emails, and claimed all that was “testing.”. I’m not a db administrator and I’ve actually never installed SQL Server except for two exceptions: SQL Server Express and SQL Server Developer.
- Hello Community, I'm currently working on a project where I will need some SQL licenses, however I have some questions in regards to what level of.
- Per Core Licensing for SQL Server 2012. SQL Server 2012 Enterprise, Standard and Web editions are licensed by core instead of processor.
I have to install SQL Server 2014 Standard on a customer’s server. My boss purchased two licenses as the server has four cores. I’ve been searching without any luck on finding out how to apply the two licenses to my installation when I do it. I’m only given the opportunity to enter one license key during the installation. I apologize ahead of time if this isn’t the place to ask this question; but, I’m not found any other place that comes close to answering this or provides me an opportunity to ask.
I’m hoping for a clarification on SA and VM license mobility. I was under the impression that if I licensed by VM clients by core (we’re using Enterprise Edition) and with a 4-core minimum per server, we were covered. I was recently told by our licensing rep that this situation requires SA for something called “License Mobility” that allows us to move the VM between hosts more often than once every 90 days. However, I’m getting conflicting information from the licensing guide on whether SA is required in the situation where I cover every single core in my VM farm: Near the bottom of page 9 (“How to license individual machines”), it mentions that if I’m assigning licenses to the guests, SA is required to move them to other hosts. On page 11, it says that I can run unlimited VMs (up to 1 per core in the host) as long as I license every single core in my farm.
It doesn’t make a mention of SA until near the bottom of the page, and then only in the context of removing that “up to one guest per core” limitation and not in the context of mobility rights. It seems like License Mobility doesn’t’ apply in my scenario because I’m licensing the entire VM farm and not actually moving any licenses around – they stay assigned to their physical host. I’d be moving VMs around at will, but not really reassigning any licenses (as long as I stay below the “one guest per host CPU” limitation). Am I reading this correctly? Our licensing rep seems to be ignoring what I’m asking and just insisting it’s safer to always have SA (which I agree with – it’s always safer to buy more than you need), but it doesn’t seem like the licensing guide actually requires SA here. Is this a fight worth having, or am I reading it wrong and I should give in to buying SA? Thanks for your help!
I’m asking if I can make the switch without forcing me to buy SA – I believe I can, but the licensing rep was telling me I was required to have SA and it didn’t make sense. I found another write-up – I’m basically asking if I can do what this guy is describing in the “License Mobility without SA” section at the bottom of page 10: I realize I can’t do that if I license by guest, but if I switch to licensing the entire physical host for each of my hosts that’s allowed to run SQL clients, I think I’m covered and it doesn’t require SA. As long as I’m not crazy, I’ll just need to get my license rep to see it my way as well 🙂. Hi, I’m setting up SQL Server 2014 Standard for our ERP upgrade coming at us in the next couple of months. Normally I would look at CAL licensing the sql server and call it a day, BUT I’m pulling my hair out trying to figure out how I should license if I am bringing orders in from a Shopify+ ecommerce site using the shopify web service API, and I will be extracting product and customer data from the ERP system to load into Shopify using the API. On one hand, it only looks like I need to license for the system that will host the application that does the web api calls, but the way the licensing is worded, it almost sounds like I need to core license it because I’m using a “proxy” to gather data from users using the Shopify web site despite the fact that in no way is the Shopify system is making any kind of calls for data from our end. Hi Brent, We’re determining whether to go with Standard or Enterprise Editions of SQL Server.
I’ve tried asking the rep but they only point me to this location: In 2016, as Database Mirroring is removed, would you happen to know if there a hard limit on the number of Basic Availability Groups we can have? And in terms of licensing, if we only have 1 server accessing the database and all the users if they need to use the application have to RDP into the server to use the application, would that classify as 1 CAL then? For the Ozar communityhaving trouble getting this nailed down by MS or Software One, our licensing vendor. We have two VM Hosts. #1 is licensed and holds all of our Primary SQL Enterprise AO AG Servers. #2 is NOT licensed and holds all of our secondary AO AG Servers. Non are Readable.truly Passive.
We have Software Assurance so we have License mobilitybut We are under the understanding that this mobility from VMHost to VMHost is only applicable if all our SQL Servers move from #1 to #2we can’t nickle and dime VMs moving from #1 to #2all or nothing. That’s all fine, I understand that. The Issue: if we have a failover eventor we want to apply patching (say add an SP). We can fail back fairly quicklybut for a short time there is an active SQL Server on VMHost #2 which is not licensed. Back in the day, there was a 30-day grace period to get Services back to the primary in the event of a failure. My guess I’m remembering this from the days before SA mobilitybut whatever. I’m not sure about any of this.
What I want to know is if there is a grace period to get the primary active again. I’ve gotten all sorts of advice:. “There is a grace periodundefined”. “Don’t worry about itjust get things back to VMHost#1 and when the trueup comes things will be kosher for MS. If the Tree falls in the woods and nobody heard it, it didn’t really fall”. “Absolutely no grace periodobligated to license VMHost#2 unless you can make every VM failover when even 1 fails – so mobility covers it” Any comments? I’m having trouble with counting User CALs.
We have a software vendor with a maintenance agreement that allows them to utilize the software on our servers for application maintenance/troubleshooting. They do this through a single user account, and there could be a varying number of employees sharing that account, depending on the severity of the issue. We have User CALs for all of our employees that use the system for regular production use. Do I need User CALs for the currently unknown number of vendor employees that may log in to our system for support purposes? I’ve scoured Google, and I can’t find anyone else even asking this question.
This is an awesome thread for these questions. One more: If I have an MSDN subscription and install an instance of SQL Server on a server, can other developers access that instance for development purposes? For example, the SQL server instance would service a web application we are developing and would be accessed by a service account for the web app, and by each developer as they test locally. Each developer is already accessing multiple other SQL Server instances that are fully licensed, so I assume they have whatever client licenses they need. Thank you for any light you can shed!
Microsoft Sql Server 2012 Web Edition
Can I use one Enterprise SQL server core 2 license, for multiple Application servers viz. SharePoint, Mange Engine, Great Plains, Lync, System Centre, Airwatch, etc.? If YES, what licensing scheme is applicable? My idea is to create multiple SQL server instances and DBs on single Enterprise SQL server with core 2 license on a high-end and high availability hardware. Each SQL server instance for each of the application servers sitting on a separate HW.
Each of the application server can connect to their respective SQL instance with SQL Server CAL. You could set up a SQL Server Enterprise with only a dual core CPU, but nobody does this (4 cores are the absolute minimum I’ve heared). But if you have an dual core server, you could install as many SQL instances on it as you want – but they will fight for the spare CPU-power (and maybe RAM), so that the server will be very slow. A much better solution in this case would be a single SQL instance on a server with 4 or more CPU cores. You must NOT create / install multiple SQL servers on different hardware servers with your dual core license. On the other hand: why do you not use a SQL Standard Edition (much cheaper) or a free SQL Express edition?
When your company is so small, that you believe, that a dual core server could handle all the load of multiple applications (e.g. Because there are only.
I have a question about MSDN licenses and SQL Server. We have a couple of SQL development environments that use production data for testing and development against and I am trying to understand if we could use MSDN licenses more effectively. Currently we have SQL Development environments using Production Licenses because we cannot use SQL Developer versions against production data.
Sql Server Licensing Guide
But would it be possible to license say 15 or 20 developers with an MSDN license and then use MSDN LIcensed SQL instances with production data for testing and development. It might be more cost effective to use MSDN licenses for that many people rather than using production licenses? That way we can do multiple dev environments with production data but not have to incur the cost of multiple production sql licenses? Does this make sense? Is this permissible? Let me clarify myself because I may be wrong.
What I was saying is related to the SQL Server Developer editions. As I understand, you cannot run production data on a SQL Server Developer Edition, even for testing and development testing. I thought I had read that you can only have development data on the Developer Editions. If I am not correct on that, then that may be our issue but what I am trying to advise our company on is the proper and most cost effective license scenario so we can have development environments properly licensed but not paying the SQL Server license costs for each development environment that I believe we currently license at production licenses costs. If your dev server has a valid (paid) standard / enterprise license, you do not need to get another for THIS server (but it would be a waste of money). But you must not install your Enterprise on prodsrv01 and the same license on devsrv01. In this case you would have to pay for both servers.
If you did so, you should uninstall it on the dev server (don’t know if there is a way to change the edition type without reinstall), get a developer license for each of your devs and install a developer edition on the server. Hello, Brent.
We have a serious argument with one of my colleagues about paragraph 4 in this article. Lets say, we have 3 node cluster and one sql instance that can travel across these 3 nodes. Of course it is running only on one node at a time. Does this mean we have to buy licenses for two servers, as we only allowed to have one stand by server? Or does stand by server means that it has a RUNNING SQL-service? And in case of three node cluster, where the instance travels across only TWO nodes, and there is a second, mirrored (lets say via AlwaysOn) instance on the third node, but it is not queried.
How many servers do we have to license? We have a customer who is looking to migrate some SQL servers from 2012 to 2016 but we are trying to find the right way to do this.
We don’t want them to have to buy 2 licenses per server as they are doing the migration. Do you have a way to find the migration rights for SQL 2016 to see if they are allowed to migrate over to another server or server cluster?
Are they allowed to use the migration license on the new server where they are migrating toward and on the existing server they are decommissioning at the same time? From my understanding the customer may upgrade to and use SQL version 2016 in place of software covered by the Qualifying License i.e. SQL server 2012 licensed with active SA.The Customer may not use software under both licenses simultaneously. Can you please confirm if my understanding is correct. If you would have read at least the last few month comments, you would know, that Brent will you only direct to your MS vendor (I guess, that he risks some trouble when he gives you a wrong advice and particularly in the USA this could become very expensive).
Regarding your question: as far I know you can’t license an Enterprise Edition on server / CAL-Basis, this is only possible for the Standard edition. And of course you have to license every single SQL Server that you are using (except developement only), except you are using VM’s and license EVERY CPU Core in the VM-host – in this case you could install as many VMs with SQL Server as you want on THIS host. But as always – ask your vendor (there must be a reason, that there is a (hard) certification title named Microsoft Certified Licensing Professional).
Downloading is not illegal, but using it (particularly for non-developing purposes, except it is the free Express edition). On the other hand – why did you download a 8 year old version and not the most recent (since this week SQL 2017 is out).
For differences between the editions google for “ms sql difference editions”. For prices ask a software vendor (Amazon / ebay would be ok for a short overview, but licensing a SQL Server is very complex). If your database will be.