RE: Intel-Hyperthread-Linux-Oracle
- From: "Post, Ethan" <Ethan.Post@xxxxxx>
- To: <david.hill@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Hollis, Les" <Les.Hollis@xxxxxx>, <Christian.Antognini@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <richard.c.ji@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:13:07 -0600
Oracle has always been willing to negotiate with big players for obvious
reasons.
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of david hill
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:03 PM
To: Hollis, Les; Christian.Antognini@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
richard.c.ji@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Intel-Hyperthread-Linux-Oracle
Looks like you got a nice rep. Les
=20
Here's what Oracle says in their licensing definition.
=20
http://oraclestore.oracle.com/OA_HTML/ibeCCtpSctDspRte.jsp?section=3D1136=
5
<http://oraclestore.oracle.com/OA_HTML/ibeCCtpSctDspRte.jsp?section=3D113=
6
5&me
dia=3Dos_g_english_help_licensing> &media=3Dos_g_english_help_licensing
=20
Processor: shall be defined as all processors where the Oracle programs
are
installed and/or running. Programs licensed on a Processor basis may be
accessed by your internal users (including agents and contractors) and
by
your third party users. For the purposes of counting the number of
processors which require licensing, a multicore chip with "n" processor
cores shall be counted as "n" processors.
=20
Good news is though, it looks like the industry going to be pushing
oracle
to change it. Little Story at the Register today
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12/09/mcnealy_oracle_pricing/
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12/09/mcnealy_oracle_pricing/>=20
=20
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
