Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Oracle on Windows Server Vs Xp-Pro
Howard J. Rogers wrote:
> 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.
If they are trying to forbid using the workstation to serve an Oracle Database to a few users, wouldn't they say so?
Also, what about SQL-Server? Is SQL-Server restricted on workstation class machines?
It is curious that this clause is so general. What is a "Device"? Is a bar-code scanner a "device"? It certainly connects to the PC and uses its resources. What about a palm-pilot attached to the serial port? Or a pen-based tablet, or a device that reads input from a labratory scale or temperature sensor???
>
> 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 don't know that this is so certain. They will naturally give you the answer that is most restrictive. Contracts are always subject to interpretation. Each party to a contract has the right to make good faith interpretations of the meaning of the language.
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
Received on Wed Dec 22 2004 - 21:05:29 CST
![]() |
![]() |