none
SQL Enterprise vs SQL Standard Server 2016 edition – what to choose? RRS feed

  • Question

  • I’m planning on building an SQL cluster for our company: 2 hosts, active-active clustering.

    SQL Enterprise Edition seems too expensive. However, I’ve heard that SQL Server 2016 Standard edition should have a 2-node replication feature? I'm stuck and cannot figure out what the difference between these two licenses is.

    That’s why I am asking for your help!

    Should we buy the Standard license? Will it work out good for our case?

    Tuesday, August 18, 2015 7:56 AM

Answers

  • We cannot answer that question for you. You need to go through the list if differences (posted in this thread) and based on that determine whether you feel like EE is worth the price. We cannot do that prioritization for you.

    There is no thing such as "active-active". Perhaps you mean a failover cluster with two nodes and two instances? I.e, one instance normally executes on one node and the other instance normally executes on the other node?

    Yes, there is peer-to-peer replication in EE. But this is basically building blocks on which you can build your application which (done right) can both scale and have fault tolerance - but this need to be built-into the app. It is in no way transparent to the app.


    Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP | web | blog

    Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:39 PM
    Moderator
  • Hello,

    See Features Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2016 for the differences between the Editions.


    Olaf Helper

    [ Blog] [ Xing] [ MVP]

    Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:25 AM
  • I suggest you clearly define what it is you want to achieve, and based on that we might be able to suggest a technology for your needs.

    When you say active-active, I assume you want both machines to process queries at the same time, right?

    Would that be against the same database, or separate databases?

    If the same database, would you want to be able to both read and modify the data on both nodes?

    When you say "rollback if needed", do you expect to be able to go back in time for some transaction or point in time for the database? Like one machine always lagging some time period and if something bad happens you make this the "active" node and hence has skipped last 10 minutes or whatever?

    As you realize, there are some of details we need to know, regarding what you prerequisites are. If you can elaborate on your needs, including commends on my questions above, we might be able to narrow down a technology or combination of technologies that will suit you.


    Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP | web | blog

    Wednesday, August 19, 2015 1:24 PM
    Moderator

All replies

  • SQl server 2016 is still in CTP phase I would not suggest you to base your testing on it. I would say let RTM version release and then you can use it.

    Why dont you go for SQl Server 2014 standard ?


    Please mark this reply as answer if it solved your issue or vote as helpful if it helped so that other forum members can benefit from it

    My Technet Wiki Article

    MVP

    Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:01 AM
    Moderator
  • Hi,

    if you have only two Hosts for clustering than, the Standard Edition is enough.

    SQL Server 2016 Standard edition supports two-node failover clusters. the Enterprise Edition supports unlimited nodes (operating System Maximum).

    thanks

    diramoh

    Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:12 AM
  • Hello,

    See Features Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2016 for the differences between the Editions.


    Olaf Helper

    [ Blog] [ Xing] [ MVP]

    Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:25 AM
  • We cannot answer that question for you. You need to go through the list if differences (posted in this thread) and based on that determine whether you feel like EE is worth the price. We cannot do that prioritization for you.

    There is no thing such as "active-active". Perhaps you mean a failover cluster with two nodes and two instances? I.e, one instance normally executes on one node and the other instance normally executes on the other node?

    Yes, there is peer-to-peer replication in EE. But this is basically building blocks on which you can build your application which (done right) can both scale and have fault tolerance - but this need to be built-into the app. It is in no way transparent to the app.


    Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP | web | blog

    Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:39 PM
    Moderator
  • I’m planning on building an SQL cluster for our company: 2 hosts, active-active clustering.

    SQL Enterprise Edition seems too expensive. However, I’ve heard that SQL Server 2016 Standard edition should have a 2-node replication feature?

    I think someone told you about AlwaysOn Availability Group feature on Standard Edition which would support two nodes.
    I'm stuck and cannot figure out what the difference between these two licenses is.

    That’s why I am asking for your help!

    Should we buy the Standard license? Will it work out good for our case?

    Rest are already answered so I am not spending my energy.

    Balmukund Lakhani
    Please mark solved if I've answered your question, vote for it as helpful to help other users find a solution quicker
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My Blog | Team Blog | @Twitter | Facebook
    Author: SQL Server 2012 AlwaysOn - Paperback, Kindle

    Tuesday, August 18, 2015 11:39 PM
    Moderator
  • I am confused by "2-node replication feature." Could you elaborate more on this? I am speculating you mean a failover cluster instance (FCI) that has two nodes.  If you are truly talking about replication would this be transactional replication, snapshot replication, peer to peer replication or merge replication? 

    With SQL Server 2016 standard edition will also support two node Availability Groups. This is brand new as previous versions of SQL Server (2014 and 2012) required enterprise edition.

    Wednesday, August 19, 2015 1:30 AM
  • SQl server 2016 is still in CTP phase I would not suggest you to base your testing on it. I would say let RTM version release and then you can use it.

    Why dont you go for SQl Server 2014 standard ?


    Please mark this reply as answer if it solved your issue or vote as helpful if it helped so that other forum members can benefit from it

    My Technet Wiki Article

    MVP


    from what I know, SQL Server 2014 Enterprise edition supports 2 nodes.. which again will be completely out of our budget :(

    Wednesday, August 19, 2015 12:42 PM
  • I am confused by "2-node replication feature." Could you elaborate more on this? I am speculating you mean a failover cluster instance (FCI) that has two nodes.  If you are truly talking about replication would this be transactional replication, snapshot replication, peer to peer replication or merge replication? 

    That’s right! I mean preferably I would like to have active-active solution with the snapshots, so I could roll back if needed.
    Wednesday, August 19, 2015 12:43 PM
  • I suggest you clearly define what it is you want to achieve, and based on that we might be able to suggest a technology for your needs.

    When you say active-active, I assume you want both machines to process queries at the same time, right?

    Would that be against the same database, or separate databases?

    If the same database, would you want to be able to both read and modify the data on both nodes?

    When you say "rollback if needed", do you expect to be able to go back in time for some transaction or point in time for the database? Like one machine always lagging some time period and if something bad happens you make this the "active" node and hence has skipped last 10 minutes or whatever?

    As you realize, there are some of details we need to know, regarding what you prerequisites are. If you can elaborate on your needs, including commends on my questions above, we might be able to narrow down a technology or combination of technologies that will suit you.


    Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP | web | blog

    Wednesday, August 19, 2015 1:24 PM
    Moderator
  • I have heard that when using StarWind in Azure (as an option) you can get MS SQL Server Enterprise level functionality having the Standard license on board, which is obviously much (!!!) cheaper than Enterprise . You may check it here. What do you think? 
    Wednesday, August 19, 2015 4:25 PM
  • This is a question that we cannot really help you with; if you are a SQL Server DBA then this is something you should be able to assess yourself; but here are a couple of pointers just concerning the Database Server.

    Assess the Criticality of the Databases,  current and any up and coming Projects and assess if the Always On Feature in Standard Edition will support a sufficient number of nodes that will be acceptable to the company.

    When assessing, ensure you assess every aspect of SQL Server your company is using and could benefit from.

    Assess the business needs; current and for any up and coming Projects that could introduce new databases to the cluster.  essentially you need to assess them from the Point of view of will any of the databases benefit from Enterprise Edition; such as Table Partitioning.

    This however is a discussion you need to have with your fellow DBA's and Developers; so you can provide a proper assessment that can be reviewed by yourself and by Management.


    Please click "Mark As Answer" if my post helped. Tony C.


    Wednesday, August 19, 2015 4:44 PM
  • Mods,

    This would better fit as discussion IMHO.


    Please mark this reply as answer if it solved your issue or vote as helpful if it helped so that other forum members can benefit from it

    My Technet Wiki Article

    MVP

    Thursday, August 20, 2015 6:15 AM
    Moderator