Are you as sick of Oracle licensing as I am? We were audited in November and I was shocked.
First, Oracle re-defines the rules over time and expects you to pay for definition changes. Remember when concurrent 'devices' used to be concurrent 'users'? "Any redefinition of metrics and measurements should be at Oracle's expense" (quoted in the silicon.com article below).
We had a hard time with the difference between our sales rep's definition of compliance and Oracle's License Management Group's. It's so darn complex that even the sales reps can't keep up with it. From now on, I'll get it in writing.
This idea of batch processing needing to be counted at the furthest end is bull. We have a system with a proprietary database that collects phone call data. Nightly, 1% of the data is posted to an Oracle db. They wanted us to count all the phone connections as a named user or migrate to processor licenses. Threatening to move it to SQL Server didn't even phase them.
Another thing .. migration. If you're forced to migrate, the ratio is 75 concurrent devices = 1 processor. How many of you have 75 concurrent devices on 1 processor? That's rediculous.
Here are the articles. I copied the yahoo article from another post.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...e_dc_4&cid=581
http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunn...&REQAUTH=21046
http://ww1.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/fix...dctag=database
