Hey Ignition Team,
We are trying to quote a solution for our customer using Microsoft SQL Server Standard Edition as a part of our ignition solution. However, we are planning to use the Server + CAL licensing Model meaning each user/device using the sql server needs an access CAL.
Our original assumption is that because the users do not access the SQL server indirectly (table in perspective web page) that we do not have to get CALs for the 20+ operator stations.
However, Microsoft produced this document suggesting that indirect access to SQL data is considered Multiplexing/Data Pooling, which requires an access CAL License.
This means, if we want to stay compliant with Microsoft's terms, each of the clients who need access to SQL data served by ignition must have a CAL.
Does anyone know if ignition perspective counts as a multiplexing/pooling device or is this geared more towards software that helps a user interact with the database? For example, visual studio allows you to interact with a database, therefore the user requires a user/device cal.
Basically, I want to find out if I have to get 20 CALs for each of the operator stations, or can I get 1 CAL just for ignition?
1 Like
IANAL, but I would expect you to need 20 CALs.
(This is among the many reasons I do not supply SQL Server to clients.)
4 Likes
Our sales engineering team also recommend that you do not use CAL licensing, for the reasons you suspect.
2 Likes
Thanks pturmel,
I had a feeling this was the case. Unfortunately our customer wants a non open source data base. That basically leaves me with Microsoft and Oracle.
@Kevin.Herron I get that, I would prefer Core license too. Unfortunately this is a high speed scenario and Bill Gates charges by the core for some reason. If I am to utilize all 6 cores on my server, I have to buy 3 per core licenses ($3,945 USD per 2 core pack & MOQ 4 cores) for 1 server. Plus they want a redundant server so make that 12 cores total. So the TLDR is it is much cheaper to go CALs at this point. ($989 USD per server + $230 USD per CAL)
SMH Microsoft and Oracle, SMH. On top of this, getting support for details on licensing is a huge hassle. Microsoft doesn't like dealing with customers directly, so it usually goes through a 3rd party vendor who struggle to quote a complex system.
I wish Inductive was a vendor for SQL server. I like working with you guys. Thanks a million!
2 Likes
Make sure your customer realizes that they're probably using more open source software (indirectly) than they realize that's used by many software packages that are not open source, such as:
- Ignition
- Microsoft .NET (This is directly open source, but used by a lot of software)
- Probably many others, but just from the information from your post, they're using both.
2 Likes
SQL Server Redundancy? Ignition redundancy? Both?
What an utterly baffling requirement.
Oy! Have they not noticed that both Google's Big Data and Amazon's Red Shift are built on top of PostgreSQL ? And you can use EnterpriseDB's commercial spin of PostgreSQL if you really want the "commercial" label in your own install. (EnterpriseDB is the primary sponsor of PostgreSQL.)
In other words, someone has bought Microsoft FUD at a huge premium price.
But whatever. They'll have to pay and pay and pay.
I will not resell any Microsoft products. At all. I'm happy to deploy on Microsoft platforms that someone else purchases and supports. That's a hard line for me.
1 Like
You are not alone, and I commiserate. Sometimes they want to have some DBA who has never looked at an Ignition database to go in with SSMS and figure everything out. But I bet there are suitable IDEs in Postgres world too.
1 Like
I think the customers worry is not so much a security thing, its likely more of a support thing but I am just speculating.
Paid support is available, from big, stable companies, for all of the open source products I mentioned (and more), as contracts or pay-as-you-go. The support "issue" is the biggest chunk of FUD MS excretes.
1 Like