Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> Re: Oracle licensing term "named user"
Lol - we had a meeting with Gartner the other day. We are a hospital
corporation so since all the patient data goes into an Oracle DB
Oracle recommending an unlimited/enterprise license for us. Gartner
said "Oracle is crazy" and told us to sit tight on licensing until all
this "named users" stuff clears.
DON'T let Oracle do an audit. They will offer to do one for free. They are pulling a Microsoft/BSA tactic into scaring people into upgrading the licenses for more than they actaully use.
Disclaimer: I am not a decision maker at my company. I am just passing what I hear. None of what I say should be taken as legal advice. Blah....blah... blah...
p.s. Since MS played hardball on us with our desktop and office licenses (ie threatened a BSA audit) we are moving many folks to a Linux desktop. Talk about a saving!
On Wed, 08 May 2002 10:08:52 -0600, Thomas Gaines <Thomas.Gaines_at_noaa.gov> wrote:
>In preparation for a discussion with my organization's purchasing
>people, I'm reviewing our Oracle license usage. Long before I
>arrived on the scene here as DBA, my organization purchased a
>license for "100 named users on an unlimited number of servers,"
>to quote our IT manager. I realize that only our Oracle license
>sales rep can definitely answer my license-related questions, but
>before I talk to him, I wanted to hear your opinions.
>
>What exactly is a "named user"? Would each noninternal-Oracle
>process in the v$session view be a named user? Would the use
>of MTS affect the way that we count our named users? What
>about other forms of connection pooling? I'm woefully uninformed
>in this area, unfortunately.
>
>My group delivers web-based maps, using Oracle as the
>back-end repository for the data. The map server makes numerous
>Oracle connections, but they're all as the same Oracle user. If each
>of these sessions can be grouped together as one "named user", we're
>on Easy Street. Otherwise, we may be running up to some licensing
>limits.
Received on Wed May 08 2002 - 13:57:15 CDT
![]() |
![]() |