October 8, 2009 at 8:33 am
Richard M. (10/8/2009)
Thordog (10/8/2009)
I think the difference here is processor license compared to server license, which are two different things. The processor license lets you run as many instances of SQL Server as you want, based on the fee for the total processors in the machine. The server license lets you run SQL Server based on the CPUs you choose and servers you want to pay for. Right? 😎Correct on the processor license, but additionally on the Per server license lets you run SQL on a server regardless of the number of processors, but requires you additionally to have either User or Device CAL's to access that SQL server.
Server license = CAL license. You only buy 1 server license (that only comes with 5 CAL licenses) and then additional CAL licenses to match the max concurrent connections you will have on your server, no dependency on hardware. But then SQL Server does not monitor license connections (like say Terminal Services) does it? So it is again still "on your honor" licensing;-)
Shawn Melton
Twitter: @wsmelton
Blog: wsmelton.github.com
Github: wsmelton
October 8, 2009 at 8:54 am
Melton (10/8/2009)
Server license = CAL license. You only buy 1 server license (that only comes with 5 CAL licenses)
Not really. You actually purchase a Server license and then, in addition, you purchase CAL's (Client Access Licenses), which come either by user or by device. The difference is that the first is basically for A user, regardless to what SQL Server he connects to. It's like that users permit to connect to any database. The second, is married to a device, meaning that from that device you can connect to a SQL server instance, regardless of the actual number of users that use that device (obviously not simultaneously).
and then additional CAL licenses to match the max concurrent connections
There is no longer such thing as "concurrent" connections from SQL 2005 on. You can have as many as your Hardware allows.... all you need to have is the proper licensing, as you mentioned "on your honor" licensing"
October 9, 2009 at 2:59 am
Richard M. (10/7/2009)
Right... they get you with the "You have to acquire licenses only for processors that are accessible to any copy of the operating system upon which SQL Server 2005 is installed"Now, what sense would it make to have 2 Quad processors and make one "unavailable" to the OS....
I suppose this might be intended for the situation where you're running a virtual machine on your dual quad-core box, and the virtual machine is only configured to use one of the CPUs. A copy of SQL installed on the virtual machine would then only need a single CPU license, even though it's technically running on a machine with 2 processors if you look at it strictly from the hardware point of view.
October 9, 2009 at 7:00 am
October 14, 2009 at 11:44 pm
Hi,
I have remembered that, we have 1 processor license for SQL Server 2000 Standard edition. Now we have Upgraded (In-place) it to SQL Server 2005 Enterprise edition. Now how the licensing terms change?
thanks
October 15, 2009 at 1:58 am
rambilla4 (10/14/2009)
Hi,I have remembered that, we have 1 processor license for SQL Server 2000 Standard edition. Now we have Upgraded (In-place) it to SQL Server 2005 Enterprise edition. Now how the licensing terms change?
thanks
you need to get yourself a single processor enterprise edition license.
October 15, 2009 at 8:38 am
October 15, 2009 at 8:41 am
Richard M. (10/15/2009)
...and the CAL's for 2005, if not already in possession.....
you dont need CALS for per processor licensing
October 15, 2009 at 8:44 am
October 15, 2009 at 8:49 am
Richard M. (10/15/2009)
oops... right... missed out on the per processor license part 😀
it doesnt actually say, but as they had a proc license for 2000 i assumed they bought the same for 2005.
Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 24 (of 24 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply