Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Could Mark Townsend please comment on this question re: Standard Edition

Re: Could Mark Townsend please comment on this question re: Standard Edition

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 09:59:36 -0700
Message-ID: <1160931572.57865@bubbleator.drizzle.com>


Niall Litchfield wrote:
> hpuxrac wrote:

>> Mark Townsend wrote:
>>> hpuxrac wrote:
>>>> Charles Hooper wrote:
>>>>> hpuxrac wrote:
>>>>>> I just did an install of Oracle Standard Edition 10.2 on a linux 
>>>>>> centos
>>>>>> 4.3 machine and created a database.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did acknowledge thru OEM that I was aware of the license 
>>>>>> requirements
>>>>>> for the oracle packs ( configuration/diagnostic/tuning ).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The database control comes up and yes indeed you can use the
>>>>>> Performance tab, ADDM, etc on the standard edition database.
>>>>>>
>>> <Snip>
>>>
>>>>> I had the same experience with Oracle 10.2.0.2 Standard Edition on
>>>>> Windows 2003 x64.  The first time you log in as SYSMAN, you are given
>>>>> the chance to disable the performance tuning pack and other features
>>>>> that should not be an option for Standard Edition licenses.
>>> <Snip>
>>>
>>>> Thanks I wasn't aware of that wrinkle.
>>>>
>>>> At the present time it seems like the first thing you "are supposed to
>>>> do" with Standard Edition and the database control is to "rely on
>>>> someone" to turn off these features before they are used.
>>>>
>>>> If you turn them off from the database control I wonder if the grid
>>>> control somewhere else can still access those features.  That would
>>>> also probably be something that there's no way to be properly licensed.
>>>>
>>> Is there still an outstanding question here ?
>>
>> There were several.  If you want a short recap here you go:

>
> here's my take. Given that asking Oracle to comment definitively in
> usenet seems a little bit ambitious.
>>
>> 1) Why does oracle ship the product with the options packs installed
>> configured and ready to use when in fact one can never license those
>> packs?
>>
>> a) is that a bug and should it be reported as such to oracle support?
>>
>> b) if it is not a bug then why is it done like that?

>
> No it isn't a bug. It's a design feature. This isn't intended to be
> flippant, if you think about how AWR works it isn't the sort of thing
> that can be removed easily from one code base (EE) in order to fit the
> others.
>
>>
>> 2) Is the product properly designed so that it is fully functional
>> without using any of the packs?

>
> Yes, the option packs certainly make the use of Oracle more
> straightforward but you can manage Oracle perfectly well without them -
> though database control/grid control becomes an almost complete waste of
> time given the fact that it is built assuming all packs will be licensed.
>
>
>> 3) What are the implications for any people who use grid control and
>> have a set of enterprise edition and standard edition databases that
>> they need to manage/monitor/support?

>
> Great question as far as SE goes - EE clients can be monitored by either
> Grid or database control, but then given that Mark has suggested that
> the thinking is that companies running SE don't need to monitor or
> manage their databases (quite an extraordinary suggestion in my opinion)
> then presumably they haven't paid much thought to this subject and/or
> are happy that money that could/should have gone to them goes to people
> who sell monitoring tools.
>
>>
>> 4) Are there any potential legal implications for both oracle and
>> oracle customers because oracle is shipping a product that has features
>> enabled and ready to use that one cannot license?

>
> Great question, especially for AWR that is adding additional useless
> processing overhead (admittedly not much) to SE databases, that is there
> is processing going on/storage being used and so on, that SE customers
> cannot use. it would be interesting actually to see how AWR in
> particular compares with various legislations definitions of computer
> misuse.
>
>>
>> That's probably a good set of items to start with.
>>

>
> I still, though to be honest I don't have much hope, stay with my
> original suggestion way back when that Oracle just take our money
> (http://www.petitiononline.com/oraman/petition.html) namely
>
> "We request that Oracle Corporation make all of its Enterprise Manager
> management packs available to all of its customers at the same price,
> regardless of the edition of the Oracle product that they have purchased."
>
> At the time Mark suggested that Oracle preferred to talk directly to
> customers, presumably they have a much larger sample that suggests that
> standard edition customers don't want to manage their databases
> responsibly.

I am far more optimistic than you. I think it likely Mark is a champion of our concern and just needs time to overcome internal opposition from other quarters.

I also think it likely his best friends will be in legal as I highly doubt an enforcement action based on ... we gave it to you enabled and you were supposed to disable it ... would get more than a laugh from most court systems.

But in the end ... refusing to sell to your customers that which they have demonstrated a willingness to pay for ... is rather un-Oracle.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org
Received on Sun Oct 15 2006 - 11:59:36 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US