November 11, 2010 at 8:08 pm
Does anyone have experience regarding the costs of support for open source databases? I keep hearing about how great open source databases are because they are "free" but what are the benefits beyond that? I know that companies typically sign yearly support contracts for their open source systems, but what do those run?
Any stories or experiences would be helpful.
Thanks!
November 11, 2010 at 10:01 pm
I can't speak for the open source dbs, but for open source Linux we used to have a support contract that was similar in cost to that of Windows.
The other thing is skill sets. If you have to retrain people, or hire new people, those can be significant costs. Overall, it seems that when you compare the cost of people running the database, the cost of the software is insignificant.
However in the short term, having a relatively free database can be an advantage if budgets are tight, and your team can work with the software.
I don't know how developing against MySQL/PostgreSQL compares to SQL Server. Granted people doing VB.NET seem like they're more productive in terms of getting something out there, but there is also the quality might be lower.
November 11, 2010 at 10:31 pm
I want to add on to what Steve was saying. Some (many?) of the open source databases have licensing models that if you use them purely in-house you don't have to release your source code, but if you sell a product that sits on top of them you need to license it. MySQL was this way and Postgre was free both ways, which is why a business partner chose it over MySQL. You also need to consider database sizes and whether one of the free MSSQL products will work for you, an aweful lot depends on what you need it to do and how big your database will become.
With all that said, I can't say that MSSQL will ALWAYS be the right answer for you.
Just remember licensing fees aren't the only costs associated with software.
CEWII
November 12, 2010 at 5:49 am
Thanks for your responses. We are being encouraged to embrace open systems because they are cheaper, but no one knows how much the contracts cost. Or the training. I was hoping to find someone who had negotiated a contract to understand how much they actually are.
But I do appreciate any and all feedback!
November 12, 2010 at 6:01 am
Yea, had to face the same dillemma at my workplace, and you would be surprised how much proprietary versions of both mysql and postgres cost. If you are weighing between going with sql server or going open source and signing a support contract, you will find that it's cheaper to just go sql server (especially considering all the bonuses that come with sql server, like ssis and ssrs, sql profiler, perfmon, etc.). However, if you just need a database, and you are willing to dive into learning mysql/postgres yourself and not sign a support contract, open source will save you a bundle.
But then you have to ask yourself... how much is your time(used to learn a new dbms well enough to not need support) worth? Then the pricetag on each product starts to look very similar...
November 12, 2010 at 8:57 am
It's hard to compare costs for your company because each company can negotiate things differently. When we had different sources, we had a Premier MS agreement. While that was 100,000s /yr, we also had Enterprise Edition everywhere and could add new instances without a new license cost, or without a big one. So adding one new MySQL instance, using quoted support from Red Hat would have cost us more.
The other issue in terms of training is that you are assuming that classes will generate some skill that's equivalent. I'm not sure that's true. Or will your people really want to work with MySQL instead of SQL Server?
Note that I'm not trying to convince you not to do it. I think MySQL and PostgreSQL are great products. They can perform just as well (or better or worse) than SQL Server for many core database functions. The things that you have to consider are well beyond cost. Training, attitude, supporting multiple platforms, experience, replacing personnel, etc.
If you have people with some experience in the products, then it is probably worth trying. It definitely can be cheaper if your admins and developers don't need training. If you have to retrain people, I'd struggle to think that with core database functions you'd save money. Unless time to get that experience doesn't matter.
The other thing to think about was mentioned above. SQL Server includes a lot of stuff that doesn't necessarily come with the other products (SSIS/SSRS).
November 14, 2010 at 10:06 am
There are subtle differences between the different RDBMS's that mean chop and change may not be as cheap as it should be.
You could be faced with quite a bit more code rewriting that you first imagined.
Paid for support for MySQL used to be extremely cheap but ORACLE appear to be in the process of changing that.
What price do you put on expertise? If you have some highly experienced SQL Server DBAs and someone takes the decision to change DB platform on grounds of license cost alone then how to you acquire a similar level of expertise for your new chosen platform? You may be surprised at just how much unmentioned activity that expertise is being used to support.
Nothing is more painful than finding out "so that is what they used to do all day".
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply