The current version of MS SQL Server is primarily licensed on a
per-processor basis. They probably mean licenses for 16 processors. You
can then put that on 16 small machines, 2 fairly large or 1 very large,
and AFAIK you can move the licenses between the machines freely.
Per-processor licensing is *required* if you want to
publish-to-the-internet. If you run intranet only, you can use
per-*device* (client device, that is) licensing if you want to, but MS
is pitching to make this go away (for example, removing it from their
enterprise agreement contracts). There is no such thing as per-*user*
licensing.
//Magnus
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Trainor [mailto:trainor@uic.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 10:17 PM
> To: Andrew Sullivan
> Cc: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Press release for 7.3
>
>
> 16 is the wrong type of number for Microsoft, unless the 15 is maybe
> 10+5+1 or 5*3+1. maybe they had 1 already.
>
> i ghost-wrote a mini-grant for a non-profit legal aid clinic
> that wanted to upgrade their Microsoft server setup.
> Microsoft has per-user licensing.
> everything asked for was delivered by Microsoft.
>
> douglas
>
> Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
> >That's not quite true. One of the proposals used MS SQL Server.
> >(They said they had 16 licenses of SQL Server Enterprise donated by
> >MS to them. I wasn't sure exactly what they'd need that many
> >licenses _for_ exactly; but then, I'm used to being able to set up
> >another database without worrying about software costs.)
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
http://archives.postgresql.org