7 ms·

My first question was licensing cost. Here's the rate : $18 per processor per month to use GraalVM Enterprise.

lifty 5y ago
In true Oracle style, they will bleed you dry.
alberth 5y ago
> “Processor: shall be defined as all processors where the Oracle programs are installed and/or running. Programs licensed on a processor basis may be accessed by your internal users (including agents and contractors) and by your third party users. The number of required licenses shall be determined by multiplying the total number of cores of the processor by a core processor licensing factor specified on the Oracle Processor Core Factor Table which can be accessed at http://oracle.com/contracts http://oracle.com/contracts. All cores on all multicore chips for each licensed program are to be aggregated before multiplying by the appropriate core processor licensing factor and all fractions of a number are to be rounded up to the next whole number.” -- x86 has a 0.5 core multiplier. So if you have a 16-core server, you need to purchase “8 processors”. And before people start spewing Oracle hate, this is standard enterprise on-premise licensing practices used by Microsoft, IBM, SAP etc. https://www.oracle.com/ae/a/ocom/docs/graalvm-price-list.pdf https://www.oracle.com/ae/a/ocom/docs/graalvm-price-list.pdf https://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/contracts/processor-core-factor-table-070634.pdf https://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/contracts/processor-core...
- viraptor 5y ago
  > And before people start spewing Oracle hate, this is standard enterprise on-premise licensing practices used by Microsoft, IBM, SAP etc. I don't see why we can't be annoyed at all the large enterprises with their "negotiate your own per-core price and commitment" sales.
e12e 5y ago
$216/year pr CPU not pr core? That's... Incredibly cheap? Less than $2/core/year on the right CPUs? Ed: ah, no. See sibling comment
MrBuddyCasino 5y ago
Per socket or per core? Whats the business case where this makes sense, it seems a pretty steep price?
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  Since there’s a free version either the extra performance of the paid version pays for itself or it doesn’t.
- native_samples 5y ago
  Probably cases where hw is expensive or where your workload doesn't scale horizontally all that well, or where latency is a big deal (better perf = lower latency = less hw needed).
luma 5y ago
The trouble you'll run into with Oracle licensing is that, in many cases, when they say "core" they mean cores for the underlying hardware. If you are running this on a virtual machine, Oracle will traditionally want you to license every core on the box underneath, even if you're only carving out 2 or 4 or whatever for the VM itself. Worse, if your VM platform supports migration (vMotion et al), they will then insist that you buy licenses for every core the workload could theoretically run on. For modern hypervisors, this often times means licensing every core in your virtualization estate. I've had Oracle licensing tell me this exact thing with a straight face. There are more than one law firms in the US which do nothing but sue Oracle on their client's behalf. When your licensing terms are so odious that multiple law firms can make a living fighting your terms.... something isn't right. "One Rich Asshole Called Larry Ellison"
- edoceo 5y ago
  I replace Rich with Raging - but both work.
- alberth 5y ago
  Above is old info. It’s no longer billed that way. See https://www.oracle.com/assets/cloud-licensing-070579.pdf https://www.oracle.com/assets/cloud-licensing-070579.pdf —- > “ Amazon EC2 and RDS - count two vCPUs as equivalent to one Oracle Processor license if hyper-threading is enabled, and one vCPU as equivalent to one Oracle Processor license if hyper-threading is not enabled. Microsoft Azure – count two vCPUs as equivalent to one Oracle Processor license if hyper- threading is enabled, and one vCPU as equivalent to one Oracle Processor license if hyper- threading is not enabled. When counting Oracle Processor license requirements in Authorized Cloud Environments, the Oracle Processor Core Factor Table is not applicable.” The key is that last sentence.
  - viraptor 5y ago
    The document is about cloud licensing. You're replying to a comment about vmotion which most likely means on-premise setup.
  - izacus 5y ago
anthk 5y ago
OpenJDK > 11 has GraalVM inside, you can activate it with a switch. https://openjdk.java.net/projects/graal/ https://openjdk.java.net/projects/graal/
- vips7L 5y ago
  This is partially incorrect. JEP 410 [0] will be removing them from HotSpot in the next release (17). Project Metropolis has also been put on hold, so for the foreseeable future if you want Graal features, you'll have to use GraalVM [1] [0] https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/410 https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/410 [1] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/metropolis-dev/2021-June/000046.html https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/metropolis-dev/2021-...
  - grashalm 5y ago
    That is incorrect. JVMCI is still in OpenJDK and is the only thing required to run Graal. You need to put Graal as jar from Maven on the upgrade-module-path since JEP 410 since it's no longer there by default but this is the only thing that changed. So you can continue to use Graal as your last tier compiler or to compile Truffle languages on OpenJDK.
    - vips7L 5y ago
      I see! I must have misinterpreted the mailing list.
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    > so for the foreseeable future if you want Graal features, you'll have to use GraalVM This isn't true - you can use Graal from a JAR just fine.
tomcam 5y ago
There is no chance Facebook is paying anywhere close to the published price.
bradleyjg 5y ago
How does this work with dynamic cloud workloads. If I can effectively tack this on to my AWS cost with the same granularity then I could use it only where I come out ahead. But if the whole monthly core licensing thing means that I effectively have to make an all or nothing decision on my entire cloud fleet on a month by month basis that’s far less likely to be worth it.

In true Oracle style, they will bleed you dry.

> “Processor: shall be defined as all processors where the Oracle programs are installed and/or running. Programs licensed on a processor basis may be accessed by your internal users (including agents and contractors) and by your third party users. The number of required licenses shall be determined by multiplying the total number of cores of the processor by a core processor licensing factor specified on the Oracle Processor Core Factor Table which can be accessed at http://oracle.com/contracts http://oracle.com/contracts. All cores on all multicore chips for each licensed program are to be aggregated before multiplying by the appropriate core processor licensing factor and all fractions of a number are to be rounded up to the next whole number.” -- x86 has a 0.5 core multiplier. So if you have a 16-core server, you need to purchase “8 processors”. And before people start spewing Oracle hate, this is standard enterprise on-premise licensing practices used by Microsoft, IBM, SAP etc. https://www.oracle.com/ae/a/ocom/docs/graalvm-price-list.pdf https://www.oracle.com/ae/a/ocom/docs/graalvm-price-list.pdf https://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/contracts/processor-core-factor-table-070634.pdf https://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/contracts/processor-core...

viraptor 5y ago
> And before people start spewing Oracle hate, this is standard enterprise on-premise licensing practices used by Microsoft, IBM, SAP etc. I don't see why we can't be annoyed at all the large enterprises with their "negotiate your own per-core price and commitment" sales.

e12e 5y ago

$216/year pr CPU not pr core? That's... Incredibly cheap? Less than $2/core/year on the right CPUs? Ed: ah, no. See sibling comment

MrBuddyCasino 5y ago

Per socket or per core? Whats the business case where this makes sense, it seems a pretty steep price?

chrisseaton 5y ago
Since there’s a free version either the extra performance of the paid version pays for itself or it doesn’t.
native_samples 5y ago
Probably cases where hw is expensive or where your workload doesn't scale horizontally all that well, or where latency is a big deal (better perf = lower latency = less hw needed).

luma 5y ago

The trouble you'll run into with Oracle licensing is that, in many cases, when they say "core" they mean cores for the underlying hardware. If you are running this on a virtual machine, Oracle will traditionally want you to license every core on the box underneath, even if you're only carving out 2 or 4 or whatever for the VM itself. Worse, if your VM platform supports migration (vMotion et al), they will then insist that you buy licenses for every core the workload could theoretically run on. For modern hypervisors, this often times means licensing every core in your virtualization estate. I've had Oracle licensing tell me this exact thing with a straight face. There are more than one law firms in the US which do nothing but sue Oracle on their client's behalf. When your licensing terms are so odious that multiple law firms can make a living fighting your terms.... something isn't right. "One Rich Asshole Called Larry Ellison"

edoceo 5y ago
I replace Rich with Raging - but both work.
alberth 5y ago
Above is old info. It’s no longer billed that way. See https://www.oracle.com/assets/cloud-licensing-070579.pdf https://www.oracle.com/assets/cloud-licensing-070579.pdf —- > “ Amazon EC2 and RDS - count two vCPUs as equivalent to one Oracle Processor license if hyper-threading is enabled, and one vCPU as equivalent to one Oracle Processor license if hyper-threading is not enabled. Microsoft Azure – count two vCPUs as equivalent to one Oracle Processor license if hyper- threading is enabled, and one vCPU as equivalent to one Oracle Processor license if hyper- threading is not enabled. When counting Oracle Processor license requirements in Authorized Cloud Environments, the Oracle Processor Core Factor Table is not applicable.” The key is that last sentence.
- viraptor 5y ago
  The document is about cloud licensing. You're replying to a comment about vmotion which most likely means on-premise setup.
- izacus 5y ago

anthk 5y ago

OpenJDK > 11 has GraalVM inside, you can activate it with a switch. https://openjdk.java.net/projects/graal/ https://openjdk.java.net/projects/graal/

vips7L 5y ago
This is partially incorrect. JEP 410 [0] will be removing them from HotSpot in the next release (17). Project Metropolis has also been put on hold, so for the foreseeable future if you want Graal features, you'll have to use GraalVM [1] [0] https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/410 https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/410 [1] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/metropolis-dev/2021-June/000046.html https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/metropolis-dev/2021-...
- grashalm 5y ago
  That is incorrect. JVMCI is still in OpenJDK and is the only thing required to run Graal. You need to put Graal as jar from Maven on the upgrade-module-path since JEP 410 since it's no longer there by default but this is the only thing that changed. So you can continue to use Graal as your last tier compiler or to compile Truffle languages on OpenJDK.
  - vips7L 5y ago
    I see! I must have misinterpreted the mailing list.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  > so for the foreseeable future if you want Graal features, you'll have to use GraalVM This isn't true - you can use Graal from a JAR just fine.

tomcam 5y ago

There is no chance Facebook is paying anywhere close to the published price.

bradleyjg 5y ago

How does this work with dynamic cloud workloads. If I can effectively tack this on to my AWS cost with the same granularity then I could use it only where I come out ahead. But if the whole monthly core licensing thing means that I effectively have to make an all or nothing decision on my entire cloud fleet on a month by month basis that’s far less likely to be worth it.