* Scale up would mean increasing the performance of a single (or small cluster) or database servers. Where scale out would be replicating the database across a much larger cluster to achieve similar performance. Since SQL Server is licensed the licensing costs are lower when scaling up vs scaling out. The drop in server costs at the high end as well as moving storage to the SAN has made scale up less of a critical issue than in the past. RAM has gotten a lot cheaper. Building out a database server with quad xeons (32 cores) and 256GB or RAM as well as high end SAS controller (24x 2.5" backplane) is under $8K. Going to 1TB of RAM, SSL offloading, and off server storage array is still under $10K.
This is exactly the point I was trying to make with scaling up on the Microsoft stack. If you were to go to Dell and build your $8k DB server, you would still need a $3000 license for Server 2008 R2 Enterprise edition (arbitrary 32 GB RAM limit with Standard; note this is better if you use Server 2012 Standard, then its just $800), and a
$10,500 MS SQL Server Standard license, and even that can only use 4 of your 32 cores!!! Want to mirror your DB for redundancy? Sorry, that's Enterprise edition, (4 cores or 1CPU only even!) =
$29,339.95 for each server!!!Granted I don't keep up with MS licensing details since they change with every edition and are very confusing. But using Linux and PostgreSQL you end up with an
entire redundant copy of your beefy DB server for the cost of 1 MSSQL license. This is especially bad since the MS cost doesn't hit you at the beginning on a small server when you are using their nice tools to develop it (or bizspark), but
only when you need to scale to a beefy server and are already locked in.
Anyone proposing using the MS stack for a startup should be familiar with the licensing (PDF:
MSSQL licensing,
Windows Server licensing) up-front. It's a total mess. Even worse with VMs in the mix. That's pretty much the root of my problem with scaling with the MS stack; having just a bit of knowledge of Linux & related solutions you can run circles around an MS solution at a far lower cost. This is critically important for a startup without a reliable revenue stream.
BTW, we use the ASP.NET and MSSQL server stack where I work, and I have used it quite a bit (admittedly, for Intranet-style apps, but they get a reasonable amount of traffic.) It's great as a technical solution, but has a bad value proposition as a web startup solution.
---
Then again someone who finds a $300 conference "outrageous" likely hasn't had a very successful career in database development so don't beat yourself up for continually spewing nonsense. I mean these are things picked up on the job and I doubt you will learn that stocking the shelves at Best Buy is very rewarding.
U mad? U MAD LMAO dude your still mad over that thread WOW LMAO don't worry butthurt lube takes care of that...
Sorry, this counts as a troll thread. Granted it was a reply to a troll thread but I don't think that's the proper counter-troll response.
