Comments on: Oracle FUD – The Phantom Menace: Licensing on VMware vSphere

By: Top 18 Tips & Quotes on the Challenges & Future of VMware Licensing

Top 18 Tips & Quotes on the Challenges & Future of VMware Licensing — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 07:09:17 +0000

[…] into accepting some non-standard wording to your disadvantage).” – Michael Webster, Oracle FUD – The Phantom Menace: Licensing on VMware vSphere, Long White Virtual Clouds; […]

By: vcdxnz001

vcdxnz001 — Wed, 19 Aug 2015 03:10:53 +0000

In reply to Serge Vedrine. Hi Serge, In most but not all cases customers have already licensed more named users than they will have to worry about processors. Where there is for example 25 NUP per processor, then you still need to maintain compliance of the software running on the hardware based on the number of processors it is entitled to run on. For example, if you license you application for 500 users and you need 1 processor per 25 users, you can use 20 processors, or 40 x86 E5 cores (for example). This is sufficient for two x dual socket 10 core servers. But on said servers you can run an unlimited number of application instances provided it fits within the physical resources of the hosts. As with everything it comes back to your contract.

By: Serge Vedrine

Serge Vedrine — Wed, 22 Jul 2015 18:59:04 +0000

Why do you state that the Phantom Menace does not apply to NUP licensing if the # of processors is used to calculate the minimum number of NUP licenses for Oracle Database Enterprise Edition (25 NUP X #processors) ?

By: vcdxnz001

vcdxnz001 — Wed, 27 May 2015 21:14:51 +0000

In reply to J. I believe there was a case in France, but I don't have the details. All the issues I'm aware with and have been involved with have been sorted out with negotiation and have avoided legal action. Oracle is entitled to everything that is legally owed to them under the contract that the customer has agreed to and signed, and not a penny more. The contract replaces all prior communications, both verbal and written. What customers should do is understand their contract and ask Oracle to point out where it says in the contract, whatever it is that Oracle is saying. This usually avoids any need for legal action.

By: J

Wed, 27 May 2015 20:17:21 +0000

Michael – I understand the argument you make and it makes sense – the contract is the binding document. Now the question is this – To your knowledge has anyone taken Oracle to task on this point and actually won?

By: popovicbozo

popovicbozo — Sat, 31 Jan 2015 14:57:31 +0000

In reply to vcdxnz001. Thanks Michael

By: vcdxnz001

vcdxnz001 — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 06:26:07 +0000

In reply to popovicbozo. Hyper threading does not impact core factor or licensing. You license the physical cores only. Therefore in the case you describe with 4 cores its 2 processors. But as always it comes down to your contract wording and that is the only legal document that matters.

By: popovicbozo

popovicbozo — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 11:46:22 +0000

Hi Michael,

i am constantly running into Oracle accounts and i need a small help understanding the definition of a “Core processor licensing factor” from Oracle’s document “Oracle Processor Core Factor Table”

Do we have some Oracle official explanation?

For example: If the factor is 0.5 like it is for the Intel x86 family, for a server with enabled 2 CPU socket with 2 cores and hyper-threading enabled how many Oracle CPU licenses do we need:

1. (2CPU-sockets * 2CPU-cores) * 0.5Core-factor = 2 Oracle CPU licenses

2. ((2CPU-sockets * 2CPU-cores) * 2) * 0.5Core-factor = 4 Oracle CPU licenses

3. Something else?

Thanks in advance.

By: vcdxnz001

vcdxnz001 — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 15:35:00 +0000

In reply to paulmeehan2013.

I agree Paul. But it doesn’t have to be a court action or full audit. You simply have to ask Oracle where in your contract the ‘policy’ they are referring to exists. Put the onus on them to point it out. If it doesn’t exist, then it’s irrelevant. This is the easiest way to attack the FUD that some are peddling. If it’s not in the contract it is not enforceable, end of story. ‘Where does that requirement exist in my contract?’ Is a powerful question that more customers need to use.

By: paulmeehan2013

paulmeehan2013 — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 14:12:06 +0000

Hi Michael,
great article and you might have seen my post on Twitter. It was from a friend in a company that specialises in software that saves customers money on true-ups etc. The problem acceding to my buddy is that rather than face the risk of an Oracle full blown audit or court action, many customers bow to pressure and bullying by Oracle and settle these discussions. It's entirely ridiculous. This is the challenge and it is entirely related to plunging revenue/profits at Oracle – this is how they plug the gaps. It's entirely unsavoury but in almost 20 years in IT I have seen many bad practices used by that company. It amazes me that they maintain their market share position.

Paul