SQL Server Multiplexing and Device CAL

Question

SQL Server Multiplexing and Device CAL

lostdisk

SSC Eights!

Points: 816
More actions
July 29, 2013 at 10:19 am

#281139

So, I am working on trying to determine how many device CALs we need for our system, and we are having a bit of a problem determining how many device CALs are needed. Hoping to get some guidance here, on 2 different areas.
Overview of system:
Devices in people's homes transmit via RF to a Gateway (hardware), which then takes all of those transmissions and sends them to a central server, where a Windows service receives it in and inputs the data into the SQL database.
Now, in cases where the device in people's homes can not reach the Gateway, we have handheld devices that get loaded with information to go out and obtain this information. Typically this is loaded manually, but we do have the ability to load the handheld device automatically. If the device is loaded automatically, the files that would have been created manually, are created and then transmitted to the handheld though a wireless connection.
Questions:
So the above leads to 2 questions.
1. do the devices in peoples homes require Device CALs? They do not access the databases directly ever, and the data is passed to and from the Gateway itself.
2. When handhelds are loaded automatically, do they need a Device CAL?
Any help would be much appreciated.
Long story about why we are not talking to a VAR yet. I have read thought all the Microsoft documentation I can find, but the rules are not clear about the above.
Thanks
LD

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Elliott Whitlow SSC Guru Points: 102402 More actions · Answer 1

I would have to check the SQL 2012 licensing guidance but I believe that if you have more than a few end points that core/processor licensing of SQL would save a LOT of money. Previously multiplexors didn't reduce the costs of licensing as I read the guidance.

CEWII

lostdisk SSC Eights! Points: 816 More actions · Answer 2

CEWII-

I am pushing for the use of Core/Processor licensing, but basically I am being asked to prove my case.

I have a feeling that the devices in the people's homes (endpoints) will have to be licensed when a Gateway is used, but not for a manually loaded handheld. In a one way system, the endpoints to not use the data, services, or functionality which is where the questions have started. They simply send data via RF to the gateway. In a 2 way system, they do (as requests are sent back to the endpoints).

Any help proving my case would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

LD

Elliott Whitlow SSC Guru Points: 102402 More actions · Answer 3

I am looking now, but honestly I think you can make the price point purely on CAL vs core even without considering the one-way traffic.

MSRP per core for standard is $1793

4 Cores = 7172

8 cores = 14344

MSRP per server plus call is $898 plus $209/CAL

Server = 898

End Point count to match 4 Cores = ~30

End Point count to match 8 cores = ~64.3

Basically my point is that if you are able to run on a 4 core machine then you need to have over 30 licensable end points for core licensing to make sense or 64 licensable end points for an 8 core equivalent.

If your project is of any size my guess is that these end point counts are easily reached.

I am looking at the datasheet and I'll see what I can find on those one-way end points.

CEWII

lostdisk SSC Eights! Points: 816 More actions · Answer 4

CEWII-

Thanks for the amazing response, and depending on if the one way endpoint would need a CAL or not, would be dependent on if I can make my case.

In some of the smaller installs, we are looking at 3 users, 1 gateway, and 200-300 endpoints. If the endpoints don't need a CAL in this case (since they don't ever use any of the data, files, or services from the SQL Server) then I loose my per processor argument. If they do need a CAL, then I win it.

Thanks again!

LD

Elliott Whitlow SSC Guru Points: 102402 More actions · Answer 5

I looked at the SQL 2008 licensing guide and it included the phrase:

Use of hardware and/or software that reduces the number of devices or users that directly access or use the software

(multiplexing/pooling) does not reduce the number of CALs required.

I know it isn't the SQL 2012 guide but this perhaps highlights MS' position on that point. This checklist is also included:

The Server/CAL model is appropriate when:

• You can count your users/devices

• The number of users/devices is low enough that the cost is lower than using the Per Processor model

• You plan to scale out your use of SQL Server by adding new servers over time. (Once you have purchased the necessary CALs, you only need additional Server Licenses for new servers.)

• Users are accessing many SQL Server databases

Not sure if that helps..

CEWII

Elliott Whitlow SSC Guru Points: 102402 More actions · Answer 6

Found the licensing guide (more detail than the datasheet) and found this: http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/about-licensing/briefs/multiplexing.aspx

Your one-way example seems to fit into Figure 2 on page 2 and would not require a CAL.

CEWII

Elliott Whitlow SSC Guru Points: 102402 More actions · Answer 7

lostdisk (7/29/2013)
CEWII-
Thanks for the amazing response, and depending on if the one way endpoint would need a CAL or not, would be dependent on if I can make my case.
In some of the smaller installs, we are looking at 3 users, 1 gateway, and 200-300 endpoints. If the endpoints don't need a CAL in this case (since they don't ever use any of the data, files, or services from the SQL Server) then I loose my per processor argument. If they do need a CAL, then I win it.
Thanks again!
LD

In general practice I don't recommend it, but you could sell some licensed one way and bigger installs licensed another. I do want to point out that even in core licensing, the smallest number of cores to license is 4 so even of you had a single or dual core machine, you have to license 4.. In this case I think that you can't chose a one size fits all model.

I hope the link I included on multiplexing helps.

CEWII

lostdisk SSC Eights! Points: 816 More actions · Answer 8

CEWII-

Thanks for all of your help, I had just found that document, but still wasn't sure if it would work that way.

I am still going to push for processor CALs, since I think our new system (2-way to endpoints) will require it anyway.

Thanks again for all of your help.

LD

Elliott Whitlow SSC Guru Points: 102402 More actions · Answer 9

Its really tricky, I would probably talk to MS directly and if possible get it in writing.

Good luck.

CEWII