August 3, 2005 at 7:11 pm
I have a client/server application installed on a centralized server at the corporate office. Each workstation has a client installed and each workstation connects to the application server at corporate reading from it's own ini file which defines the IP address of the application server @ corporate.
The application server at corporate has its own ini file that lists a DSN name variable. This System DSN using a SQL Server ODBC driver has been configured on the application server. The application server therefore connects via this single ODBC Data Source Name (DSN) connection to the SQL Server box located in the same corporate office server room.
I have the following questions:
1. Is this single system DSN configured on the application server creating a single connection thread to the SQL Server 2000 server?
2. Since the application server is connecting to teh SQL Server 2000 server using this system DSN, are all 440 concurrent client workstation users who connect through this one system DSN configured on the application representative of ONE DEVICE LICENSE?
Could my single connection between the application and the database servers effect performance of the client/server application?
August 4, 2005 at 10:31 am
I may have found information that answers my own question. Please reply if you think I am wrong. Thanks
At this web site: http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/multiplexing.mspx Microsoft says that "...The client computer has a direct connection to the server running MTS [or my application server in my case], but it also has an indirect connection to SQL Server because it is ultimately retrieving and using the SQL Server data through MTS[or my application server in my case]. ....... Use of such multiplexing, pooling, or related hardware and/or software does not reduce the number of CALs required for SQL Server. Regardless of how many tiers of hardware or software exist between the SQL Server and the client devices that ultimately use its data, services, or functionality, a CAL is required for each distinct input to the multiplexing, pooling, or related software or the hardware front end."
Does this mean I need 440 device/user licenses rather than the one [application server] device license?
August 4, 2005 at 11:08 am
yes, this was addressed a long time ago by MS.
If the users are employees, or authenticated by your AD, then you need CALs for all the employees/devices OR you can buy them at the server for the number of concurrent server connections.
If the users are not authenticated, then you need a per CPU license for the SQL Server.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
August 5, 2005 at 2:06 pm
I don't know the current price of a CAL but you might be better off just buying the per-processor license and avoid having to worry about the number of users (current and future). We have found the ease in tracking compliance a huge benefit.
Last I heard, Microsoft will give you credit for your CALs toward the cost of the per-processor license.
As to the performance question, my guess is that the application server will more likely be the bottleneck, not the single connection to the database server. Especially if your code uses disconnected recordsets.
HTH
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply