Subscribe to SQL Server Magazine | See More SQL Server and Database Articles Here | Reprints | Or get the Monthly Online Pass—only $5.95 a month!

On Monday, Microsoft released SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 (SP2) to manufacturing. I hope that you’ve already completed your deployment strategy because you reviewed the contents of the SP2 Community Technology Preview (CTP). If you haven’t, it’s time to get busy so that you’ll know how to answer the questions that come from your bosses, users, and developers. You can obtain the full download and a collection of supporting information at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/servicepacks/sp2.mspx

.

Not sure if you want to bother? The “What’s new in SQL Server 2005 SP2” FAQ at http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/b/5/2b5e5d37-9b17-423d-bc8f-b11ecd4195b4/WhatsNewSQL2005SP2.htm lists more than 70 enhancements--not counting bug fixes--that might pique your interest. The enhancements range from relatively minor to substantial. The FAQ will take only a few moments to scan, and there’s value in staying abreast of the new features, regardless of whether you plan to roll out SP2 in the near future. You certainly don’t want someone important in your chain of command to say, “But what about the XYZ feature? How can we possibly live with out it?” when your only response is, “XYZ feature, huh?”

Microsoft has also released several goody bags to go along with SQL Server 2005 SP2. For example, the SP2 download and information site includes links and information about:

  • an updated version of SQL Server 2005 Books Online

  • a new Feature Pack (February 2007)

  • updated Samples and Sample Databases

  • the Reporting Services Add-in for Microsoft SharePoint Technologies

  • the Data Mining Add-ins for Microsoft Office 2007

    • With the release of SP2, Microsoft has announced a license change that now allows you to use unlimited virtual instances in servers that are licensed for SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition. Have enough memory and other hardware? You can buy a single license of SQL Server for the physical box, and install an unlimited number of instances or virtual instances that are contained inside a Microsoft Virtual Server sandbox.

    Naturally, there are practical limits on the number of instances and virtual servers that any one box can support. But I suspect that this new licensing change will lead to a tremendous amount of experimentation by customers who want to see just how many virtual sandboxes can be squeezed onto a server. Perhaps the major server vendors will start selling tubs of butter to grease up those servers so customers can squeeze more on.

    It will also be interesting to see how this change will affect Microsoft license sales volume for SQL Server. I’ve already heard more than one Microsoft district office sales executive speculating that the number of SQL Server instances will go way up, but customers won’t necessarily be buying new licenses. The sales reps aren’t super pleased because their quotas don’t take virtual usage into consideration. How will the new licensing option change SQL Server revenue? I suppose time will tell. Enjoy!

    End of Article


    Post Your Comments Here

    You must be a registered user or online subscriber to comment on this article. Please log on before posting a comment. Are you a new visitor? Register now

    Reader Comments

    It’s my understanding that SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition is licensed PER CPU, not per box. If that's true this may be a trap for the unwary who think they can get a few virtual instances for free by upgrading to Enterprise Edition.

    Also, be aware that virtual instance attract real license costs for other software – eg: the operating system and any other operational tools.

    You might want to call Microsoft for a price check on the difference between Standard and Enterprise Edition. It's also my understanding that ALL CPUs in the box must be licensed for SQL Server 2005 EE before the unlimited virtualisation clause applies (happy to take correction on this).

    To me the announcement on "free virtual instances" is entirely consistent with Microsoft lifting the ridiculous CPU & Memory barriers which applied to SQL Server 2000 which effectively forced customers to adopt EE for anything other than Small sized servers.

    In fact this announcement has been mooted for some time, however the sting was always going to be that one needs to upgrade to the thrice more expensive Enterprise Edition to receive any "benefit". I don't know what Microsoft salespeople are worried about since this seems to be all about offering an upgrade inducement to those using SE, rather than delivering anything substantial to those who’ve already standardised on EE. It also looks to be a gimmick designed to swing price/performance benchmarks in favour of SQL Server, but you can’t blame Microsoft for trying that on.

    ITjonv- February 22, 2007

    Article Rating 3 out of 5

    At least for Universities, 2005 Enterprise Edition can be purchased in two way: Server license + CALs, or CPU licenses.

    xied75- February 23, 2007

    Article Rating 3 out of 5

    And I’m sure the same is true for those under standard Software Assurance - per CPU or per User (CAL). However, it's my understanding that the economics are very much against using the CAL based model for widespread access to a few "enterprise class" applications.

    Irrespective of price/performance ratios or licensing models, to run virtualised SQL Server instances for anything other than Mickey-mouse applications requires multiple CPUs and in many cases multiple servers. So, irrespective of whether per CPU or per User there seems to be a diminishing return on running EE on every CPU merely to reserve the right to run a few extra "free" virtual instances on what every spare cycles remain.

    There does however appear to be some genuine advantage when undertaking server consolidation in conjunction with license rationalisation, especially with small scale applications where typically the saving derives from doing away with all those pesky blade servers on which these apps tend to proliferate. That is, there could easily be a case to be made for ditching dozens of blades for a seriously virtualised hunk of heavy metal -- or conversely, using the PolyServe approach which is where I suspect the real value lies. On the per CPU front, the advantage may eventually swing in the consumers' favour once the more powerful Xeon class multi-core processors become affordable, but still that doesn’t address the situation where some vendors want to count a core as CPU and that’s what really makes total cost of ownership difficult to calculate.

    In closing, is it still the case that SQL Server 2005 is yet to exploit multi-core in a linear fashion, let-alone when run as many virtual instances. Does anyone have an update on that?

    ITjonv- February 25, 2007

    Article Rating 3 out of 5

    		 
     

    ADS BY GOOGLE