Re: Oracle on Windows Server Vs Xp-Pro

From: Randy Harris <randy_at_SpamFree.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:36:01 GMT
Message-ID: <Rpoyd.4885$by5.1803@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>

"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message news:41c9eeb7$0$1124$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> Randy Harris wrote:
> > "Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message
> > news:41c99e08$0$4537$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> > [snip]
> >
> >>>>You'll know already, of course, that workstation-class MS operating
> >>>>systems only permit 10 concurrent users to access the machine from
> >>>>other workstations. Your anticipated load of 8 is already perilously
> >>>>close to that, and the Server O/S might be justified on those grounds
> >>>>alone -plenty more growth room. Besides which, you need to be careful
> >>>>that workstations don't do unintended 'silent' cross-connections,
> >>>>which steal from your number of permitted connections.
> >>>
> >>>I didn't know of this limit. Is this a licensing limit, performance
> >>>limit or a limitation enforced by the MS software? I have departments
> >>>with 14 Oracle "named users" and they all connect to the server every
> >>>day, even though only 2-4 may be using the application. The nature of
> >>>this department is such that they interact with the database only a few
> >>>times every hour, so the effective load on the database is negligable.
> >>>However, I have never had a problem with people connecting to the
> >>>'server' (Win-NT 4.0 workstation)
> >>
> >
> > I was well aware of the PC to PC limit of 10 but was nearly certain that
I
> > had been able to connect more than 10 Oracle clients to a system running
W2K
> > (not server). Are you certain that the limitation would stop
connections to
> > Oracle? Please pardon me if I appear to be argumentative. This is an
> > important matter for a project that I am engaged in currently, but am
not
> > set up to test at the moment.

> Just to be absolutely clear on what I'm talking about, at least:

> You cannot have more than 10 *simultaneous* connections from other PCs
> to a non-Server version of Windows. And a "connection" counts as anyone
> making an in-bound request via a network interface to a PC for whatever
> reason. So yes, Oracle would be clobbered by the limit.

> But I was not drawing the distinction between whether more than 10 is
> technically do-able, or whether it is legally permitted, and perhaps I
> should have done so.

> To sort the issue out, I think you might first want to read
>
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;314882&Product=winxp

> [watch for wrapping there]

> ...and in particular this bit:

> "For Windows XP Professional, the maximum number of other computers that
> are permitted to simultaneously connect over the network is ten. This
> limit includes all transports and resource sharing protocols combined.
> For Windows XP Home Edition, the maximum number of other computers that
> are permitted to simultaneously connect over the network is five. This
> limit is the number of simultaneous sessions from other computers the
> system is permitted to host."

> So, 10 is the limit for XP Pro, and that explicitly covers ALL incoming
> connections -so Oracle is indeed going to be affected. But whether
> that's a technical or "merely" a licensing limit is irrelevant, I would
> have said (assuming you want to stay legal). The last sentence of that
> article makes it actually pretty clear that the limit of 10 is not
> technically applied to TCP/IP connections, but that it's a licensing
issue.

> Next, read the EULA (eula.txt in \WINDOWS\system32):

>


>      * Installation and use.  You may install, use, access,

>        display and run one copy of the Product on a single

>        computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other device

>        ("Workstation Computer").  The Product may not be used

>        by more than two (2) processors at  any one time on any

>        single Workstation Computer. You may permit a maximum

>        of ten (10) computers or other electronic devices (each

>        a "Device") to connect to the Workstation Computer to

>        utilize the services of the Product solely for File and

>        Print services, Internet Information Services, and remote

>        access (including connection sharing and telephony

>        services).  The ten connection maximum includes any

>        indirect connections made through "multiplexing" or other

>        software or hardware which pools or aggregates

>        connections.  Except as otherwise permitted by the

>        NetMeeting, Remote Assistance, and Remote Desktop

>        features described below, you may not use the Product

>        to permit any Device to use, access, display or run other

>        executable software residing on the Workstation Computer,

>        nor may you permit any Device to use, access, display,

>        or run the Product or Product's user interface, unless

>        the Device has a separate license for the Product.

>

> Now, I'm no lawyer, but that certainly reads as though allowing *anyone
> at all* to connect from a remote PC to an XP Pro Workstation for the
> purposes of accessing an Oracle database is outside the scope of
> licensed activity!! A connection to an Oracle database certainly sounds
> to me like it would count as a "Device using, accessing, displaying or
> running other executable software residing on your Workstation".

> So, single-user Oracle only according to that. Which I must say came as
> a bit of a shock, even to me.

> So am I "certain that the limitation would stop connections to Oracle"?
> Absolutely 1000%, provided only that you care about being legal. :-)
> What one manages to get away with, and what one can legally achieve are,
> regrettably, often two completely different things!

> For an even more certain answer, however, I think you should get in
> contact with Microsoft directly. I did once on a similar issue
> concerning whether a Windows installation into a virtual PC "counted" as
> a licensed installation (and hence required a new purchase). They were
> very friendly, very polite, and very firm that it did. They will be
> equally categorical about this matter, one way or another, if you ask
> them (and letting us know their response would certainly interest others
> here, I think).

> Regards
> HJR
This is quite an eye-opener. Your assumption that I "care about being legal" is, of course, absolutely the case. I find the wording in the EULA a bit confusing, but there can be no uncertainty in the passage that you cite from the web site. I've always been cautious about observing licensing restrictions from Oracle, but have ignorantly violated those from Microsoft.

The timing here is uncanny. I now need to revise a management proposal that I completed yesterday.

Thank you very much for the clarification, Randy Harris Received on Wed Dec 22 2004 - 18:36:01 CST