If it's for an intranet, then you can control your user base better, and it's also more likely you can get away with a free version of sql server (unless you have huge database 1-2GB +).
You can tell sql server to only use 1 cpu if you want to. In fact that's what we're running right now, SQL 2k on 1 CPU on a dual CPU machine until we decide that we need the second CPU and get a license for it. Don't forget there are also a lot of free options out there. MySQL (which might hit some hardships if Oracle decides they don't want them doing business anymore), PostgreSQL, Oracle Lite, SQL Server Express 2005, MSDE (SQL 2000 Desktop Edition, basically the same as SQL Express 2005, but version 2000). There are probably others, but these are the big boys. If we didn't have so much legacy code to maintain that's written for SQL 2k, we'd probably be moving to one of the free alternatives. Russ > -----Original Message----- > From: Aaron Rouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 7:48 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: coldfusion and SQL2005 > > Yeah, but if you have a company with maybe a dozen users and they are > running a Win2k server on a dual CPU box, it seems like a dozen CAL > licenses > would be a good bit cheaper than a per of CPU licenses. I just am > assuming > since if on Win2k you could not section off the second CPU in the box and > would have to get both CPU licenses. I know when I was looking at Oracle > Standard Edition that it would have been a great deal cheaper since per > user > was $150 vs I think something like $6k or 7k per CPU but no idea if their > per user worked out the same way since never asked them. > > On 2/21/06, Russ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > According to Microsoft you would need a CAL for each web user (as they > are > > technically running queries on your database). Personally I think this > is > > ridiculous, but this is MS's official stance. So unless you have an > > intranet, I'm not sure if you can get away with CAL licensing. > > > > Russ > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Aaron Rouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 9:22 PM > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: Re: coldfusion and SQL2005 > > > > > > Seems like for small intranets(that out grow the needs of the Express > > > edition) that the CAL per actual user would come out a lot cheaper > than > > > buying the per processor licensing. > > > > > > On 2/16/06, Dave Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In any case, the Dell rep is wrong, wrong, wrong. This comes up > > > frequently > > > > on the list; you either need one CAL per actual user, or a > > per-processor > > > > license which supports any number of users. For most web > applications, > > a > > > > per-processor license is cheaper. All of this is posted quite > clearly > > on > > > > microsoft.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:233093 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
