...@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
George
Thanks, seems I was misquoted or the price has fallen (it was a while
ago).
At around 1700 GBP
...@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
bi-directional? PC to U2 and back.
One-directional is data collection.
Bi
: 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, Ross Ferris ro...@stamina.com.au wrote:
David,
I think your
...@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).
At around 1700 GBP (with underlying licence) that's more
, 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 multiplexing
to
some extent ?
Do bluefinity and designbais have
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
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
On 25/09/2009 09:51, Brian Leach br...@brianleach.co.uk 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
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 br...@brianleach.co.uk wrote:
My beef is quite simply with the price of pooled connections. With the
cost of the underlying licence, you are talking around
. 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 missing something. We ran
-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) 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 Pooling Statement
On 25/09/2009 09:51, Brian
...@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
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
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
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
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
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 'faster' at doing these Login/Out/In
connections than other methods exposed by U2?
-Original
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 'faster' at doing these Login
On 24/09/2009 16:45, Doug dave...@hotmail.com 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.
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 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling
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
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
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
[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
environment is prohibited without
Doug,
I fear that if you look at the terminology and description that IBM
(Rocket may change, but somehow I doubt it) use to describe a
connection pool, though you may like to think that your connection
manager is different, I fear you may fall foul of their definition
and if you look at
...@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 does satisfy the licensing - letter and
intent...
BUT usually the performance hit is so
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 IBM
(Rocket may change, but somehow I doubt it) use to describe a
: 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 IBM
(Rocket may change
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:
Doug,
I fear that if you look at the terminology and description that IBM
(Rocket may
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] Connection Pooling Statement
I RedBack you
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
] 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-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http
Well stated, David!
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
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
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:
Doug,
I fear that if you look at the terminology and description that IBM
(Rocket
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 Pooling Statement
I RedBack you would
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
2009 5:47 AM
To: 'U2 Users List'
Subject: Re: [U2] Connection Pooling Statement
If you log off and on, it does satisfy the licensing - letter and
intent...
BUT usually the performance hit is so high that it FORCES you to
connection
pooling - or to have lots more seats! Both of which make IBM
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,
40 matches
Mail list logo
