Sign in / up

back to article Hey Amazon, why so expensive for SQL Server in your cloud?

Licensing Microsoft’s SQL Server on Amazon Web Services (AWS) costs much more than it does on other cloud platforms, according to a customer who has researched the options. A SQL Server licence typically costs more than the VM (Virtual Machine) on which it is hosted, so it is significant when evaluating cloud providers ( …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Presumably Amazon use mostly legacy / UNIX type stuff for their business and don't have a decent discount in place with Microsoft....

    0 3 Reply
    1. technoscience
      Reply Icon

      Microsoft adds costs

      Windows is Legacy Windows-NT based largely on VMS. And Windows 8 is based on Windows NT.

      And VMS is basically a dead branch except Windows and 'OpenVMS'. VMS was developed for the Vax PDP in the 1970's, by David Cutler who was smart, but had a disdain (personal gripe) and was anti-Unix. Linux was based on MINIX and developed in the 1990's, now many companies use Linux for devices, desktops, servers, High Performance (from a raspberryPi, android, desktop, Tivo, SGI, Sun, IBM and Cray). Also its close cousin OS BSD used on the Apple Macs (which versions of BSD run anywhere).

      Everything else is Unix/Unix-like is in what _everything_ else runs. (Linux, Android, BSD, Macs, most servers and really all HPC).

      Microsoft SQL would be extra due to:

      - Extra hardware overhead running Windows

      - Extra cost running Microsoft Windows (license per instance)

      - Extra cost running MS SQL (license per instance)

      - Extra cost of security issues/flaws in MS Windows and MS SQL server

      So Unix/Linux is anything bug Legacy, and the extra cost makes sense. Perhaps higher than it should be, but obvious why it would be more than free, open source, intensely tested server software. There are bugs in Linux also, but releases are often before exploits, and reboots are often not required (just a restart of a service)

      1 6 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Microsoft adds costs

        You haven't got a clue what you are talking about

        2 0 Reply
  2. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
    Holmes

    Git Along, Little Dogies

    If you have "optimized for MS SQL", you are supposed to go to Azure.

    It's the name of the game.

    0 0 Reply
  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Duh

    Microsoft do not have to pay their own extortionate fees for SQL Server, and can charge what they like. Amazon have to either charge under standard SPLA per VM (which is monthly and has no concept of hourly fees), or to license parts of their infrastructure *across the board* for SQL server and can then charge what they like to recuperate the costs.

    Why, yes, I am an SPLA licensee.

    6 1 Reply
    1. Paull90
      Reply Icon

      Re: Duh

      The only option AWS would have is SPLA, any other licenses type is for internal use only and cannot be re-sold on.

      0 0 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Duh

        Paul, you misunderstand me. There are two ways of licensing VMs under SPLA - either per VM (i.e. a specific license for each VM), or by licensing the host machine (i.e. for Windows, allocate a datacentre license to the host, which means all VMs are licensed to use Windows). Licensing the host server means the costs are fixed, but if you have a sufficient number of VMs using Microsoft technologies works out better, and is probably the only sane way to bill per hour.

        0 0 Reply

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like