[Info-vax] OpenSSL CSWS-2.2-1

[Kerry Main]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Info-vax <info-vax-bounces at rbnsn.com> On Behalf Of Craig A. Berry
> via Info-vax
> Sent: April 27, 2019 7:32 PM
> To: info-vax at rbnsn.com
> Cc: Craig A. Berry <craigberry at nospam.mac.com>
> Subject: Re: [Info-vax] OpenSSL CSWS-2.2-1
> 
> 
> On 4/27/19 5:36 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> > On 4/27/2019 3:51 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
> >> On 4/27/19 9:09 AM, Kerry Main wrote:
> >>> Just look at Oracle license costs alone. Oracle savings alone often
> >>> stated as one of the reasons to move Oracle on OpenVMS A64/I64 to
> >>> Linux on X86-64.
> >>>
> >>> Sample licensing for Oracle for small environment: (5 core
> >>> server)using list pricing:
> >>> OpenVMS - 5 cores x$50,000 x Oracle  Processor Core Factor (1 for
> >>> Alpha, Integrity) = $250,000 Linux - 5 cores x$50,000 x Oracle
> >>> Processor Core Factor (0.5 for
> >>> X86-64) = $125,000
> >>>
> >>> Going fwd with OpenVMS/X86-64:
> >>> OpenVMS - - 5 cores x$50,000 x Oracle  Processor Core Factor (0.5
> >>> for
> >>> X86-64) = $125,000
> >>> Linux - - 5 cores x$50,000 x Oracle  Processor Core Factor (0.5 for
> >>> X86-64) = $125,000
> >>
> >> Given that no recent version of Oracle database server runs on VMS,
> >> those are very expensive client licenses.  Or if you are assuming
> >> that at some point they will bring Oracle classic up-to-date on VMS
> >> and release it on OpenVMS x64, how do you know they would charge the
> >> same price for it that they charge for the Linux version?
> >
> >
> > Oracle "Oracle Processor Core Factor Table" is by CPU type.
> >
> > It has nothing to do with OS.
> >
> > See:
> >
> > http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/contracts/processor-core-factor-tab
> > le-070634.pdf
> >
> >
> > It seems very unlikely that Oracle would make an exception for VMS.
> 
> Maybe.  But if the cost per license to them were higher than on other OSs
> that have a larger installed base, then I'm sure they could find a way to
> charge more for it if they felt they needed to.  It's all speculative until and
> unless they decide to port some future version of the product to some
> future version of OpenVMS x64.  I do genuinely hope that happens.
> 
> As far as processor count, people might well save more by reducing the
> number of cores than by the benefits of the core factor.  A current 8-core
> Xeon surely wipes the floor with a 32-core AlphaServer GS1280, for example.
> The folks on the oldest hardware would likely benefit the most, which is a
> good thing, as they're also likely the ones most in need of persuading to
> make a change.
>

 Minor nit, but as a fyi, the OpenVMS license model for Integrity servers is based on socket counts not core counts. 

Applies to both HPE and VSI.

Hence a IA64 server with 1 socket for all its OpenVMS licensing might be $50K. If that same server has 4 sockets, the licensing pricing jumps to $200K.

This might be reason why Neil's pricing quote awhile back was high.

Lesson learned - if you have an older Integrity server with 4 sockets e.g. I2 (or pre-I2) blade server and using HPE for OpenVMS support, moving to a new Integrity server with VSI and fewer sockets might be wise move. The change in license costs might even pay for the new server. Especially if one considers the new  I4/I6 server cores will be much faster so you likely can reduce core counts as well as socket counts and hence really reduce the overall license costs for OpenVMS Integrity.

Regards,

Kerry Main
Kerry dot main at starkgaming dot com