Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

Of Symeon Breen >Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 7:08 PM >To: 'U2 Users List' >Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > >So does this mean that all mv.net and designbais customers also should >have >connection pooling licences as well - after all they are

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

rs- >boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Brian Leach >Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 7:51 PM >To: 'U2 Users List' >Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > >George > >Thanks, seems I was misquoted or the price has fallen (it was a while >ago)

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

George Land >Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 3:55 PM >To: U2 Users List >Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > >But what you are describing is connection pooling which is when you need >connection pooling licenses. > >George > > >On 24/09/2009 23:27, &q

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

g.org [mailto:u2-users- >boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Steven M Wagner >Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 11:56 AM >To: U2 Users List >Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > >Ross > >The question that I would ask, "Was this one-directional? PC to U2. Or >

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

gt;> -Original Message- >> From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- >> boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Brian Leach >> Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 7:51 PM >> To: 'U2 Users List' >> Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement >>

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement from a different perspective

Hi Bill I raised that there are 2 options, per user or per processor. For a web site you would select the per processor model. I was generalizing licenses and was trying to point out that licensing is complex for all platforms and costs are not always as cheap as they may seem. There are gotcha

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement from a different perspective

Sorry, resend because it was hard to tell what I had written as it put the legal stuff up at the top. from the post I was replying to (so it doesn't do it again): ... SQL Server pricing depends on the licensing model one needs. Generally you get a "per processor" or a "per server" plus end

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement from a different perspective

Robert F. Porter, MCSE, CCNA, ZCE Lead Sr. Programmer / Analyst Laboratory Information Services Ochsner Health System This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other appl

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement from a different perspective

David: I must be misunderstanding your comments. You state that SQL Server, for instance, would charge a per connection license for a large web site. I don't believe this is true. SQL Server pricing depends on the licensing model one needs. Generally you get a "per processor" or a "per se

[U2] Connection Pooling Statement - While we're on the subject!

difference - will even be cheaper as you won't have to buy the DB seat! David W. > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of George Land > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 12:56 AM > To: U2

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of George Land Sent: 25 September 2009 12:40 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement It depends whether we are talking WebDE/RedBack or U2 connection pooling. If WebDE there is the underlying license but if it is a pure U2 connection pooling license for

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

nce) that's more reasonable. > > Brian > > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of George Land > Sent: 25 September 2009 10:38 > To: U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Connection

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Brian Leach Sent: 25 September 2009 10:51 To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement George Thanks, seems I was misquoted or the price has fallen (it was a while ago). At around 1700 GBP (with underlying licence) t

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

eorge Land Sent: 25 September 2009 10:38 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement On 25/09/2009 09:51, "Brian Leach" wrote: > My beef is quite simply with the price of pooled connections. With the > cost of the underlying licence, you are talking around

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

On 25/09/2009 09:51, "Brian Leach" wrote: > My beef is quite simply with the price of pooled connections. With the cost > of the underlying licence, you are talking around 3,000 GBP plus AMC per > connection, which means 10 shares costs around twice the amount you can buy > SQL Server Enterpris

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

So does this mean that all mv.net and designbais customers also should have connection pooling licences as well - after all they are multiplexing to some extent ? Do bluefinity and designbais have a statement on this ? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-U

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

connections. That is simply untenable. Brian -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson Sent: 24 September 2009 23:40 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement I'm m

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

IBM accepts this with the ODBC license. You have the option of login process query and logout, or remain logged in with connection pooling but share a pool of licenses. The same with their web services. It is concurrent licensing, which is the number of licenses logged on at any one time. If s

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

It is the exception, you are deemed to be using an approved connection pooling mechanism and a redback webshare costs the same as a connection pooled database license except for the fact that that you need to buy a database license as well as the redback license George On 24/09/2009 23:39, "Char

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

g [mailto:u2-users- >> boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Wolverton >> Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 5:47 AM >> To: 'U2 Users List' >> Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement >> >> If you log off and on, it does satisfy the licen

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

Exactly. It's been a while since I've been involved with RedBack, or been involved in the contracts, but webshares are paid for as part of RedBack, not UV or UD, aren't they? Dollars lost on the DB side are gained on the RedBack side. Since our Vendor De Jour owns both pieces, they don't m

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

ftware Visage > Better by Design! >-Original Message- >From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- >boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Glenn Batson >Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 8:43 AM >To: U2 Users List >Subject: Re: [U2] Connection P

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

>Stevenson >Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 3:40 PM >To: U2 Users List >Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > >I'm missing something. We ran Redback without connection pooling. Is >that an exception because it's a U2 product or were we in violation

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

Consider this an AD even though I also propose using freeware... > From: Ross Ferris > Interestingly, one of the scenario's we ran past IBM > back in April/March was the use of disk shares, where > people could drop files from windows applications > which would be picked up by a U2 phantom & pr

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement from a different perspective

Well stated, David! ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > > I'm missing something. We ran Redback without connection > pooling. Is that an exception because it's a U2 product or > were we in violation? ___ U2

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement from a different perspective

We as a community want U2 technology to have all the bells and whistles and to market and generally upgrades its game. But many of us want U2 to do it for free. If we don't buy appropriate numbers of licenses, then U2 will not be a viable business proposition to a supplier. As a customer we need

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

ss Ferris Stamina Software Visage > Better by Design! >-Original Message- >From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- >boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Glenn Batson >Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 8:43 AM >To: U2 Users List >Subject: Re: [U2] Con

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

riday, 25 September 2009 8:40 AM >To: U2 Users List >Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > >I'm missing something. We ran Redback without connection pooling. Is >that an exception because it's a U2 product or were we in violation? > >Ross Ferris wrote: >

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement I'm missing something. We ran Redback without connection pooling. Is that an exception because it's a U2 product or were we in violation? Ross Ferris wrote: > Doug, > I fear that if you look at the terminology and description that >

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

I'm missing something. We ran Redback without connection pooling. Is that an exception because it's a U2 product or were we in violation? Ross Ferris wrote: Doug, I fear that if you look at the terminology and description that (Rocket may change, but somehow I doubt it) use to describe a "co

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

al Message- >From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- >boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Wolverton >Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 5:47 AM >To: 'U2 Users List' >Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > >If you log off and on, it

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

-- >From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- >boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Doug >Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 1:46 AM >To: 'U2 Users List' >Subject: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > >George, > >We do not do connection poo

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

ug.org [mailto:u2-users- > boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno > Sent: Friday, 25 September 2009 9:16 a.m. > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement > > According to the letter of the U2 terms, common usage of the >

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

According to the letter of the U2 terms, common usage of the environment is prohibited without the purchase of a connection pooling license - that means many of you are in violation right now. I personally don't approve of a vendor who has a potential lawsuit pending over a large segment of their

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

My guess is that you're taking "users" as concurrent logged in users while Doug means them more as staff that may require access to the application. The various API's seem to login much faster than telnet (plus it's much easier to keep the login credentials than setup login scripts in your telnet

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

but I haven't had a call that they are slow or need more licenses. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Wolverton Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 1:47 PM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject:

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

So - I understand your point George -- I am in the same headspace! David W. > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of George Land > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 2:32 PM > To: U2 User

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

On 24/09/2009 16:45, "Doug" wrote: > George, > > We do not do connection pooling or use multiplexing software. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you did. I was trying to make a general point that you need connection pooling licences if you connection pool however you do it. > > We scale

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

2009 10:21 AM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement Interesting! When we've tried to do the same, the time to login/logout/login again KILLED performance - and you had to do it for each 'piece' to stick to the letter of the law... Is UOJ somehow

Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement

by U2? > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Doug > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:46 AM > To: 'U2 Users List' > Subject: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement >

[U2] Connection Pooling Statement

George, We do not do connection pooling or use multiplexing software. We have a connection manager written in Java to handle the connections to Universe or Unidata. We adhere to our IBM licensing agreement to the letter: one user one connection. Every call to the database requires a connection.