April 4, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Hi All,
We are planning to upgrade to SQL Server 2005.
Around 60 workstations will have access to the new SQL Server in the local network through a local .NET application.
Do we need to purchase CAL (Client Access License) for those users?
Thanks,
Regards,
April 4, 2008 at 12:48 pm
It depends. Will the .NET application cover your license needs or not? Will the users access the database EVER without going through the app? If you ask two lawyers, will you get 3 or 4 opinions? (April 1 is fading slowly)
Depends on which way you decide to license and which version. Check the Microsoft website for what your choices are. At 60 machines now, plus how much growth? Plus how many servers? It needs a sharp pencil and some thought to determine just how you want to configure the product. A site license may come under consideration, depending on whether you are using Standard or Enterprise, and other variables.
April 4, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Hi,
I missed all April's fools. Too bad it's fading. Haha.
Here is the answers:
Will the .NET application cover your license needs or not? Sorry didn't understand this one.
Will the users access the database EVER without going through the app? Nope.
Which version? SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition
At 60 machines now, plus how much growth? Not more than 5% (almost stable)
Plus how many servers? 1 Server
Regards,
April 4, 2008 at 1:23 pm
What steve was asking about the application is if it is an off-the-shelf product you purchased that already includes a SQL CAL.
I am assuming the application is one you built yourselves.
You need a CAL for any device (computer, PDA, database-aware hampster wheel, etc.) that will connect to your SQL database server if your SQL database server is not licensed per processor.
If you use any multi-plexing software (for instance a web server that makes a single connection to the database for multiple users) you still need a CAL for each workstation that will connect.
April 4, 2008 at 1:33 pm
While it never hurts to call one of the licensing specialists @ms to double-check, this may help you get a read from MS's "How to License SQL Server" document:
Sometimes organizations develop network scenarios that use various forms of hardware and/or software that reduce the number of devices or users that directly access or use the software on a particular server, often called multiplexing or pooling hardware or software. Use of such multiplexing or pooling hardware and/or software does not reduce the number of CALs required to access or use SQL Server software. A CAL is required for each distinct device or user that is connected to the multiplexing or pooling software or hardware front end.
The full document can be downloaded here:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/sqlserverlicensing.mspx
According to that, and the diagram in it - it's pretty clear your .NET app would be one such "pooling apps", so you'd have to license for each of the .NET users. You big question would be whether it's cheaper to license by processor or server+CAL.
The last rule of thumb I had read was that the break even point was somewhere around 25 user CALs per processor license for Standard Edition (75 for Enterprise), so with 60 users, it would be cheaper to use processor licenses if you server has 2 procs, but server+CAL if it has 4 processors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
April 4, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Thank you Michael! I knew in a general way, but haven't had to look at the question in over a year, and was getting interrupted before I could do the research myself.
So the question comes down to economics: Will a non-processor based license plus 60+ CALs be cheaper than a processor based license? All else being equal, you simply take advantage of the pricing rules if you can.
April 4, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Plan a bit for the future also.
If you expect another 100 users over the next year, CAL licenses may be expensive.
Then again, if you have hardware upgrade plans buying a machine with 4 processors could be a big licensing expense.
Also, MS has been somewhat unclear about per-processor cost and virtualization, but it is my understanding that even if you only have 2 processors allocated to your SQL server on a 4 processor server through virtualization, you need to still get a license for all 4 processors.
April 4, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Thank you so much for all of you.
That was really helpful.
April 4, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Michael Earl (4/4/2008)
Plan a bit for the future also.If you expect another 100 users over the next year, CAL licenses may be expensive.
Then again, if you have hardware upgrade plans buying a machine with 4 processors could be a big licensing expense.
Also, MS has been somewhat unclear about per-processor cost and virtualization, but it is my understanding that even if you only have 2 processors allocated to your SQL server on a 4 processor server through virtualization, you need to still get a license for all 4 processors.
That's the rule in a non-virtualized environment (described in the quote below as a "physical operating Environment"). Take a look at the "virtualization" section of "how to license":
When Licensed per Processor. Workgroup, Standard, and Enterprise editions of SQL Server 2005 allow for unlimited instances in each virtual or physical operating environment. For Workgroup, Standard and Enterprise Edition, each virtual operating environment running SQL Server 2005 must have a processor license for each processor that the virtual machine accesses. If a copy of SQL Server is running on a physical operating environment, processor licenses are required for all of the processors on that physical server. For Enterprise Edition there is an added option: if all processors in a machine have been licensed, then the customer may run unlimited instances of SQL server 2005 on an unlimited number of virtual operating environments on that same machine.
Take a look at the pretty pictures here:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/virtualization.mspx
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
April 4, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Hi Michael,
I guess, for 60 Clients and one processor server the "processor type" is cheaper than the "server + CALs type."
If we buy the per processor type license, are we allowed to install unlimited instances on the same processor?
(We need to create an exact replica of the production server for the development)
Microsoft Licensing is a bit complicated issue.
Thanks for all of your recommendations.
Regards,
July 4, 2008 at 1:03 am
I'm pretty sure the per processor license is cheaper,
we also have a 60 user situation and therefore have made the calculation.
If you buy the per processor license you only have to count the Physical processors and NOT the cores,
we have a dual - Quad core server and therefor may use the license for a 2 processor env.
Concerning the tests env. i was told by our vendor that we may use the same installation disks (open-value) for our environment "replica" development area as long as we do not use this dev server as a real time production env.
Therefore we have made a sql server instal with the same disks and license keys on our virtual server for testing.
works pretty smooth, at least for our kinda development (3 users simultanious), dunno about real bigtime devlopment firms.
concerning the questions about multiple instances: do not know for sure but im guessing that if you pay per processor that this means (processor - instance), so think that you may "not" use 2 instances on the same server with just 1 license.
cheers,
Eddy
July 4, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Hi Eddy,
Thank you for your opionions. We also started using virtual server instance for DEVSQL.
Regards,
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply