5 ms·

If your "enterprise" software doesn't generate $18/month, then you probably don't have a viable business model and should use the community edition. I don't tak

If your "enterprise" software doesn't generate $18/month, then you probably don't have a viable business model and should use the community edition. I don't take the Oracle hate seriously when it's all the latest fashion to pay much, much more for your CPU because it's hosted by Amazon. The alternative of "free" services in the Google-sense (ie data-mining users to sell to third parties or develop other products) seems worse, personally.

derefr 5y ago
Did you even read the parent comment? It's not $18/mo; it's $18/mo/theoretically-schedulable-substrate-CPU. For people considering running this on an IaaS, that'd literally be "$18 * [number of CPUs in the entire datacenter emcompassing your AWS/GCP/Azure zone] per month". That's a higher OpEx than pretty much any single service is worth.
- grumblenum 5y ago
  Yes, and that's trivial for useful business cases. Let's look at a service beyond reproach: https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/dedicated-hosts/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/dedicated-hosts/pricing/ Wow! An M5 costs $2300 a month, which is almost three times as much as Graal licensing would cost, assuming you paid for all 48 cores ($864). Frankly, if a minimum wage job is a larger revenue stream than your "app", then you should probably do the minimum wage job instead. There's also a community edition. It's free. I think the moral outrage about anything Oracle-related is a hollow fashion statement, like a Che Guevara t-shirt.
  - hobs 5y ago
    Or maybe they are just historically a terrible company to work with who makes mostly shitty software and everyone knows it. There's no moral outrage over here either, just "I dont want to do business with assholes who keep fucking everyone over."
  - derefr 5y ago
    > assuming you paid for all 48 cores ($864) ...no, you're still reading it wrong. It's not the number of substrate CPUs on the compute node your workload is running on. It's the number of substrate CPUs on all the compute nodes your workload could potentially ever be re-scheduled or migrated onto. I.e., all the CPUs of every single (non-reserved) compute node in the datacenter. (Or, presuming certain service-transitioning technologies, multiple datacenters!) We're talking about e.g. "the entirety of AWS EC2 us-west-2." Hundreds of thousands of machines. Millions of CPUs. By analogy: imagine there's a car-sharing service, that rents out its fleet of cars to people — but because, when you rent a car, you could theoretically end up driving any car in the rental company's fleet — they set their premium to be $18/mo * [the size of the rental company's entire rental-car fleet.] Because in theory, if you set things up just right, you could manage to drive all their cars, in one day. And so they want to charge you, at all times, for that basically-impossible worst-case upper-bound price. Do you see how insane that sounds?
    - grumblenum 5y ago
      That sounds insane because you made it up. You don’t get a bill for every core that Amazon owns because you hosted an enterprise edition of GraalVM on one. Even if that were the case, use the CE or collocate or self host.
      - adonese 5y ago
        > Even if that were the case, use the CE or collocate or self host. Or, as the op suggested, their pricing is just straight up insane
      - lokedhs 5y ago
        You don't, because there is a special case for AWS and Azure, this is mentioned earlier in this thread. If you set up your own virtualisation environment, then you're subject to those rules. However, you can work around it by separating out the machines that runs Oracle into its own groups of physical machines. It does mean that deployment of Oracle software is much more complicated, since you can't use the regular environment. You also need it to be as separate as possible unless you want to have a long discussion with Oracle's lawyers about how to interpret those clauses.

derefr 5y ago

Did you even read the parent comment? It's not $18/mo; it's $18/mo/theoretically-schedulable-substrate-CPU. For people considering running this on an IaaS, that'd literally be "$18 * [number of CPUs in the entire datacenter emcompassing your AWS/GCP/Azure zone] per month". That's a higher OpEx than pretty much any single service is worth.

grumblenum 5y ago
Yes, and that's trivial for useful business cases. Let's look at a service beyond reproach: https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/dedicated-hosts/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/dedicated-hosts/pricing/ Wow! An M5 costs $2300 a month, which is almost three times as much as Graal licensing would cost, assuming you paid for all 48 cores ($864). Frankly, if a minimum wage job is a larger revenue stream than your "app", then you should probably do the minimum wage job instead. There's also a community edition. It's free. I think the moral outrage about anything Oracle-related is a hollow fashion statement, like a Che Guevara t-shirt.
- hobs 5y ago
  Or maybe they are just historically a terrible company to work with who makes mostly shitty software and everyone knows it. There's no moral outrage over here either, just "I dont want to do business with assholes who keep fucking everyone over."
- derefr 5y ago
  > assuming you paid for all 48 cores ($864) ...no, you're still reading it wrong. It's not the number of substrate CPUs on the compute node your workload is running on. It's the number of substrate CPUs on all the compute nodes your workload could potentially ever be re-scheduled or migrated onto. I.e., all the CPUs of every single (non-reserved) compute node in the datacenter. (Or, presuming certain service-transitioning technologies, multiple datacenters!) We're talking about e.g. "the entirety of AWS EC2 us-west-2." Hundreds of thousands of machines. Millions of CPUs. By analogy: imagine there's a car-sharing service, that rents out its fleet of cars to people — but because, when you rent a car, you could theoretically end up driving any car in the rental company's fleet — they set their premium to be $18/mo * [the size of the rental company's entire rental-car fleet.] Because in theory, if you set things up just right, you could manage to drive all their cars, in one day. And so they want to charge you, at all times, for that basically-impossible worst-case upper-bound price. Do you see how insane that sounds?
  - grumblenum 5y ago
    That sounds insane because you made it up. You don’t get a bill for every core that Amazon owns because you hosted an enterprise edition of GraalVM on one. Even if that were the case, use the CE or collocate or self host.
    - adonese 5y ago
      > Even if that were the case, use the CE or collocate or self host. Or, as the op suggested, their pricing is just straight up insane
    - lokedhs 5y ago
      You don't, because there is a special case for AWS and Azure, this is mentioned earlier in this thread. If you set up your own virtualisation environment, then you're subject to those rules. However, you can work around it by separating out the machines that runs Oracle into its own groups of physical machines. It does mean that deployment of Oracle software is much more complicated, since you can't use the regular environment. You also need it to be as separate as possible unless you want to have a long discussion with Oracle's lawyers about how to interpret those clauses.