-1

We've 1500 users (no connection from internet/extranet). This number is stable and will be stable. These users will use around 150 different databases each of them have not a really intensive workload and not really large (between 1Go and 100Go, total of 5 To). We want to use SQL Server 2016.

According to my calculations, I've the following possibilities:

Standard edition per server/CAL:

  • 1500 CAL = 270k$
  • 10 servers = 10k$ (each with max. 24 cores = 240 cores)
  • Total = 280k$

For the same amount, if I use the Standard edition per Core licensing model

  • 280k$ / 3.8k$ (price per 2-cores) = 150 cores (around 6 servers)

and if I want to add an additional server, the first option will cost me only 1k$ and the second 40k$ (for 24-cores).

According to many info on the net, the per server/cal licensing is designed for company with a really low number of users (less than 30). But my calculations show that in my case I should go for this type of license (and I've many more users).

I'm lost and I think there is mistake somewhere but can't spot it.

  • I misinterpreted the licences or missed something in the licensing model
  • I've too many servers for this potential workload and should go for less cores. 100 cores is probably more than needed to handle 1500 users and 5To according to your experience.
  • Anything else?

Thx for sharing your expertise on this.

Cédric L. Charlier
  • 109
  • 4
  • it's not beacuse I use the word "licensing" in the title of the question that necessary the answer is about licensing. In this case according to TomTom, the issue is in the sizing of the servers. – Cédric L. Charlier Jul 03 '17 at 14:53

1 Answers1

0

We do not handle your legal things here, but seriously - ONE proper server should be able to handle all that load. 2-3 in hardware (2 in licensing) if you need proper redundancy. Grab a decent setup with plenty of SSD and put in 128+gb memory and I see no reason in general to use that many servers.

SQL in general (excelt OLAP queries and some data loads) puts extremely low load on CPU - you are much more likely to run out of IOPS (IO budget) which is why plenty of RAM (for caching) and a good IO subsystem is key. A decent 2x16 core server (eyeing the new AMD server chips here) should give you plenty of room CPU and RAM wise to handle everything. Using 10 servers assumes a hardware scalability of around 1990 - OR extremely special requirements, which you do not talk about.

TomTom
  • 50,857
  • 7
  • 52
  • 134