TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

A customer explains how Oracle tried to strong-arm it into a cloud sale

88 点作者 miralabs超过 9 年前

10 条评论

rodgerd超过 9 年前
&gt; At that point, they are probably looking (the very least) substantial per-core fees for the esoteric Oracle Enterprise features that they are using in production.<p>Nope, this is Oracle with their &quot;you can only virtualise on our virt stack, or you have to pay for the whole farm if a single vCPU is on&quot; trick. Except their licensing model is even more absurd than that - if you have cores switched off at the BIOS, they still count for licensing in Oracle land.<p>The substance of the article is quite correct: Oracle is using customer-hostile tactics to pump their numbers, so investors don&#x27;t realise how badly their non-core activities are actually doing.
评论 #10207574 未加载
评论 #10207679 未加载
评论 #10207783 未加载
adrianN超过 9 年前
I&#x27;m not a database person, but I wonder what makes Oracle databases so much superior to free alternatives like, say, Postgres, that companies put up with the enormous costs and hostile attitude.<p>Can somebody explain why it makes sense from a business perspective to use Oracle products?
评论 #10207602 未加载
评论 #10207779 未加载
评论 #10207605 未加载
评论 #10207882 未加载
dankohn1超过 9 年前
Can anyone name a startup (let alone a YC startup) running Oracle software? Why would anyone open themselves up to these kinds of issues in a greenfield deployment?<p>And, if not, how much longer can Oracle keep up their growth by selling only to established companies? (Yes, they can sell maintenance forever, but how about growth?)
评论 #10207639 未加载
评论 #10207682 未加载
评论 #10208118 未加载
评论 #10208052 未加载
评论 #10207867 未加载
评论 #10207671 未加载
falcolas超过 9 年前
From my experience at a previous company (who Oracle acquired, ironically), even if you&#x27;re not using any Oracle software at all, Oracle will still demand to audit you because &quot;any company over a certain size has to be using an Oracle product&quot;. And of course, you can get out of it by purchasing a license for their product.<p>The cost of declining? Dancing with Oracle&#x27;s lawyers for months or years. The company opted to allow Oracle in, and no Oracle software was to be found (this was pre-Sun acquisition, so they couldn&#x27;t even attempt a claim at MySQL or Java).<p>These tactics are nothing new for Oracle.
评论 #10208188 未加载
djhworld超过 9 年前
I worked for a company a few years ago that fell foul to this, I wasn&#x27;t privy to the exact details, but it was explained to me that Oracle did an audit and found the company were using the database on more cores than licensed for or maybe something like the VMWare situation.<p>To &quot;make good&quot; the company were offered the option to buy two Exadata racks and support contract at a very high cost, which they took up, and meant I had to spend a good few months migrating all of our applications over to the new Exadata database.
评论 #10207757 未加载
davidgerard超过 9 年前
To repeat the tale:<p>We&#x27;re discovering that literally everything is better with Postgres. Mostly because instead of a single expensive point of failure, every app gets its own clustered PG pair. Because we can, because we don&#x27;t have to think about licensing ever again.<p>Just everything not having to play nicely with anything else makes a huge difference.<p>The other nice thing is that PG is administerable by clear-thinking (and understand relational databases) non-specialists who can read a manual. You don&#x27;t actually need big-ticket support unless you do.<p>And, guess what? Our Oracle support was most keen to offer Postgres support, because they too can tell which way the wind is blowing.<p>WHAT WE DO: PG 9.3 out of Ubuntu 14.04 repos. Failover pair with a primary and standby. Primary streams write-ahead log records to standby as they’re generated. Some script gaffer-tape to watch for primary failure and fail over (I think we haven’t ever yet actually had to invoke this). Conversions done by hand with ora2pg then faff and twiddling and unit tests. Gotchas: malformed sql that Oracle accepts but PG chokes on. All cobbled together just following the docs, almost certainly better ways to do all this.<p>Postgres is in fact the 99% solution.
jkot超过 9 年前
This is not just Oracle, but it is pretty common for software dinosaurs (Microsoft, SAP...). We migrated to Redhat since Microsoft was unable to tell us exact price. Managers would risk criminal offense, by using software with unclear licensing terms.
nateguchi超过 9 年前
Is it old fashioned to try and keep your customers happy?
评论 #10207615 未加载
jpollock超过 9 年前
Key quote:<p>&quot;threatening customers with big bills for software they’re using but haven’t paid for&quot;<p>The _really_ key bit: &quot;haven&#x27;t paid for&quot;.<p>The customer is not in compliance with their software license. At that point, they are probably looking (the very least) substantial per-core fees for the esoteric Oracle Enterprise features that they are using in production.<p>I worked for a software firm that was selling telecommunications software to carriers. We charged per subscriber per year. If the carrier wasn&#x27;t paid, we didn&#x27;t get paid. However, the carrier didn&#x27;t keep their license up to date with the number of subscribers they had. Anyways, up comes the support contract for renewal. They complain about slow performance, slow releases and high fault rates - aiming for a discount.<p>We, pull out their 3 month old press release showing record numbers of subscribers, exceeding their license by 50%. To the tune of ~$500k&#x2F;yr.<p>Yeah, the contract got renewed, with no discounts. You see, they&#x27;d already received the discount.<p>Take Away: If you&#x27;re going to use software with a license, make sure you&#x27;re in compliance with that license.<p>If you use Oracle, make sure you have a scripted install and that you audit the feature set against the license. This script and feature set needs to be re-audited for every new release, since the pricing and built-in features will change. It is UP TO YOU, the deployer to ensure that you are in compliance with your license. Oracle has automated audit tools, and when it comes time to renew, they know what you are using.<p>If you use Open Source, make sure you keep it SEPARATE from your main code base and read the terms of the license you are using. BSD (with advertising) vs GPL vs LGPL vs AGPL have very different impacts on your code.
评论 #10207548 未加载
评论 #10207543 未加载
gcb0超过 9 年前
tl;dr: typical case of customer losing the tab on bar and complaining about paying the fee for lost-tab.<p>company A signed with Oracle on a contract that says they will pay per user and per server.<p>oracle asks them how many servers are running oracle software, company A has no logs, oracle says for them to pay for a big number of servers based on how many servers company A has available or pay a fixed &quot;cloud&quot; price.<p>company A now thinks they are too smart despite having made the asinine decision of supporting such contract in the past and goes to the press.
评论 #10207585 未加载
评论 #10207909 未加载