It would therefore seem that Oracle is the most generous since all the
contracts say is "processors where the software is installed and/or running"
The Northern California Oracle Users Group is a volunteer-run 501(c)(3)
organization that has been serving the Oracle Database community of Northern
California for more than thirty years by organizing four conferences a year and
publishing a quarterly journal. Download the complete digital archive of the
NoCOUG Journal using: “wget
www.nocoug.org/Journal/NoCOUG_Journal_{2001..2018}{02..12..3}.pdf”.
________________________________
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf
of dimensional.dba@xxxxxxxxxxx <dimensional.dba@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 6:04 AM
To: daniel.hubler@xxxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Oracle licensing with disk replication
Yes other vendors such as Microsoft act the same, once work besides patching is
done to it, specifically synchronization. They even have if you had a cold
server on the remote site and flipped your primary server license to it, you
cannot move that license back to PROD for 90 days.
IBM does the same. They consider mirroring to be doing work and therefore
requiring licensing Entitlements for the remote server.
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf
Of Hubler, Daniel
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 5:49 AM
To: 'oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx' <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: FW: Oracle licensing with disk replication
I do not think I asked my question very well. . . . . . .
My real question is: Is it only ORACLE who is being such. . . . sticklers?
Our contracts folks are suggesting that no other vendor. . . . with all the
software that is being replicated. . . . is behaving like this.
?????
From: dimensional.dba@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dimensional.dba@xxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:dimensional.dba@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 3:34 AM
To: l.flatz@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:l.flatz@xxxxxxxxxx>; Hubler, Daniel
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Oracle licensing with disk replication
Been there done that.
Oracle licensing has got to the point of actual number of copies of the
software is what you must pay for, yes the same applies to SQL Server.
One of oracle’s older documents on DR style setups give some leeway for a
clustered environment with single SAN and ff it is simply a remote mirror or
copy then it must be licensed. Also note the fine print that this is only
relative to the time the document was produced and cannot be put in any
contract. (March 20,2014)
https://www.oracle.com/assets/data-recovery-licensing-070587.pdf<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__www.oracle.com_assets_data-2Drecovery-2Dlicensing-2D070587.pdf%26d%3DDwMFaQ%26c%3DFdThBvJHxSAZ8-R9NIS_sODV3ezb9Po6yjZ5Lt_XtNs%26r%3DYSSKXQ0_Lrv3cQCUPgcr3rnHB3G_K3yVFuEU4i6dvBI%26m%3DJxsFzG5H_nH0FVGUxZVT-flQt_EMoAwDxnpHhLEVCoE%26s%3DTLbTvTX9hg6ClnLtPiqAkEtm5Wps95bGPCCh4KNMTT4%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7C07ec34c3bed04205b8c308d6497155aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636777148463539897&sdata=DhLROuiankThAhWW5RmMkO0Sa199ogfXjMSP%2FcVDTWs%3D&reserved=0>
I have not been able to find an updated version of this document.
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> On Behalf
Of l.flatz@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:l.flatz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 12:29 AM
To: daniel.hubler@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:daniel.hubler@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Oracle licensing with disk replication
Hi,
I strongly suggest you to get support from an independend Oracle licensing
specialist. That seems to be a marignal case.
My own licensing knowledge is sketchy. From what I know it would be important
if you have active databases running on your secondary site and if yes how
often they run and for how long.
I would sign that Oracle licencing is tough, but from what I heared Microsoft
is not better.
Without help of an specialist that is like going to court without a lawyer.
Regards
Lothar
----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
Von : daniel.hubler@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:daniel.hubler@xxxxxxxxxx>
Datum : 12/11/2018 - 22:00 (MN)
An : oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Betreff : Oracle licensing with disk replication
We started work on a 2nd data center 2 years ago, and the equipment to make it
functional is starting to come together.
One of the things that is happening is using Hitachi storage and replicating
everything in the primary data center
to the secondary.
So we end up with a bunch of storage frames at the 2nd location containing
exact copies of the disk at our primary location.
The folks who manage our contracts are telling us that Oracle corp. is being a
pain,
and demanding compensation for these replicated copies of their software, which
basically sit idle.
Personally, I can see how Oracle would want a piece of this, because we do
derive benefit from it.
The contract folks are suggesting that ONLY Oracle corp. is behaving this way.
None of our other vendors.
Does this jive with other people’s experience?
Thanks for your input.
