Do SQL 7 CALs count for a SQL 2000 install?

Hi,
I have a client with SQL 7 and they need to go to SQL 2000 via an upgrade to
run their now updated app. Do their existing SQL 7 CALs allow then to access
the SQL 2000 server or do they have to buy all the CALs again. Or maybe there
is some upgrade price.
Their vendor has priced 60 SQL 200 CALs at £8,100.00 - which isnt too cheap(!)
Thanks.From the server EULA:
"Any CAL must have the same or later version number than the corresponding
version number of the Server Software being used."
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/default.asp
Ask the vendor about upgrade pricing.
--
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--

Do SQL 7 CALs count for a SQL 2000 install?

Hi,
I have a client with SQL 7 and they need to go to SQL 2000 via an upgrade to
run their now updated app. Do their existing SQL 7 CALs allow then to access
the SQL 2000 server or do they have to buy all the CALs again. Or maybe ther
e
is some upgrade price.
Their vendor has priced 60 SQL 200 CALs at ￡8,100.00 - which isnt too cheap
(!)
Thanks.From the server EULA:
"Any CAL must have the same or later version number than the corresponding
version number of the Server Software being used."
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/default.asp
Ask the vendor about upgrade pricing.
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--

Do SQL 7 CALs count for a SQL 2000 install?

Hi,
I have a client with SQL 7 and they need to go to SQL 2000 via an upgrade to
run their now updated app. Do their existing SQL 7 CALs allow then to access
the SQL 2000 server or do they have to buy all the CALs again. Or maybe there
is some upgrade price.
Their vendor has priced 60 SQL 200 CALs at ￡8,100.00 - which isnt too cheap(!)
Thanks.
From the server EULA:
"Any CAL must have the same or later version number than the corresponding
version number of the Server Software being used."
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/default.asp
Ask the vendor about upgrade pricing.
David Portas
SQL Server MVP

do process

how can I do
perform a stored procedure with paramert from my client application but my q
uestion is sent call but transfer process to sqlserver a for example i can c
lose my application but process continue running in a sqlserver until finiss
hed, similar a job but with
out job.
Thank You
AlfSome environments and providers (e.g. .NET) will allow you to make a stored
procedure call asynchronous, meaning it does not have to wait for the
result.
So, it is hard to say if your client application can do that, because you
forgot to tell us anything about your client application.
A
<ag> wrote in message news:%23iXkfN6QGHA.4740@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> how can I do
>
> perform a stored procedure with paramert from my client application but my
> question is sent call but transfer process to sqlserver a for example i
> can close my application but process continue running in a sqlserver until
> finisshed, similar a job but without job.
> Thank You
> Alf
>

Do I need second license?

Hello,
I have MS SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition with one Client Access License.
May I
install the server as Primary on one machine and as Secondary (backup)
with Log Shipping on it on another machine, using same license?
Thanks,
GBYes,
But, note, its there for backup only and should not be used to run queries
etc...
So, if you ship the logs across to the backup server and then use database
snapshots then you are probably breaking the liecence terms and need another
liecence.
Tony.
Tony Rogerson
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials
"GB" <gennady@.telus.net> wrote in message
news:79SJf.7479$n67.3175@.edtnps89...
> Hello,
> I have MS SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition with one Client Access License.
> May I
> install the server as Primary on one machine and as Secondary (backup)
> with Log Shipping on it on another machine, using same license?
> Thanks,
> GB
>|||Since GB really asked two questions (one in the subject and one in the body)
in which a YES can answer both but it has opposite meaning I wanted to say:
No you don't need two licenses<g>.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tony Rogerson" <tonyrogerson@.sqlserverfaq.com> wrote in message
news:O0phfIUNGHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Yes,
> But, note, its there for backup only and should not be used to run queries
> etc...
> So, if you ship the logs across to the backup server and then use database
> snapshots then you are probably breaking the liecence terms and need
> another liecence.
> Tony.
> --
> Tony Rogerson
> SQL Server MVP
> http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials
>
> "GB" <gennady@.telus.net> wrote in message
> news:79SJf.7479$n67.3175@.edtnps89...
>|||Lol - teach me for reading the Q and ignoring the subject - doh!
Absolutely Andrew, and thanks for waking me up!
Tony.
Tony Rogerson
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:e7XMoyVNGHA.536@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Since GB really asked two questions (one in the subject and one in the
> body) in which a YES can answer both but it has opposite meaning I wanted
> to say: No you don't need two licenses<g>.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Tony Rogerson" <tonyrogerson@.sqlserverfaq.com> wrote in message
> news:O0phfIUNGHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>

Do i ned a Windows Server for MSDE with windows authentification ?

Hi
From the local PC windows authentication seems to work, but from remote pc's
te client seems to logon as guest.
Do i need to install MSDE on a windows server edition to get the windows
authentication working ?
SQL Authentication works from remote machines, but becorse the password is
sent as cleartext over the network i would like to use the Windows
authentication.
Can someone give me an answer on this ? ( i want to move some app from using
acces to sql server).
Hope someone helps me.
Johan.
Hi,
no you don=B4t need a Windows Server to use Windows Authentication. As
long as the machine is in the same domain and uses a service account
which is able to check the identity of the user on the domain
controller you are able to use Windows Authentication.
If you are using WIndows XP you have to disbale "Simple FIle and
Printer Sharing"
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
http://www.sqlserver2005.de
sql

DNS required ?

Hi All!
I facing the following problem:
Sometimes i get error while connecting to my SQLServer instance from client
machine "Timeout expired". I found it occurs when my DNS server is not reach
eable from client machine. But i connecting through alias, created by Client
network utility, where i s
pecify directly IP-address, NOT DNS-name ! I tried to connect through QA, os
ql - resuls the same.
Why it requires DNS ? What parameter i missing ?
Telnet on IP-address port works normally.
Server - NT 4.0 SP6 PDC, SQLServer 2000 Std Ed
Client - Windows 98 or NT 4.0IF you try to connect to a server named London, the name London needs to be
resolved to the IP address. This is the function that DNS provides...
However if you use theIP address yourself, DNS does not have to do anything.
Wayne Snyder MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Computer Education Services Corporation (CESC), Charlotte, NC
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
(www.sqlpass.org)
"Slava Melnikov" <vasya000@.yandex.ru> wrote in message
news:F6CBFA12-2F13-452B-B848-5BA82228D0A1@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All!
> I facing the following problem:
> Sometimes i get error while connecting to my SQLServer instance from
client machine "Timeout expired". I found it occurs when my DNS server is
not reacheable from client machine. But i connecting through alias, created
by Client network utility, where i specify directly IP-address, NOT DNS-name
! I tried to connect through QA, osql - resuls the same.
> Why it requires DNS ? What parameter i missing ?
> Telnet on IP-address port works normally.
> Server - NT 4.0 SP6 PDC, SQLServer 2000 Std Ed
> Client - Windows 98 or NT 4.0|||What version of the SQL Server ODBC driver (sqlsrv32.dll) is installed on
the client. There is a issue with wsome of the earlier MDAC 2.6 SQL Server
ODBC drivers. If your driver version is 2000.8.0.194 you may be running
into this problem. It also occurs on some later versions as well. If you
install one of the more recent versions of MDAC, such as MDAC 2.7 then the
problem I am describing will not occur. Of course this assumes that you are
using the version of MDAC that has the problem.
When you ping the ip address does the response come back quickly or dies it
take some time?
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.|||O-oh!
sqlsrv32.dll version is really 2000.8.0.194.
Thanks for help, Rand !
I should install latest service pack or new MDAC it's
enough ?
ping works normally

>--Original Message--
>What version of the SQL Server ODBC driver
(sqlsrv32.dll) is installed on
>the client. There is a issue with wsome of the earlier
MDAC 2.6 SQL Server
>ODBC drivers. If your driver version is 2000.8.0.194 you
may be running
>into this problem. It also occurs on some later versions
as well. If you
>install one of the more recent versions of MDAC, such as
MDAC 2.7 then the
>problem I am describing will not occur. Of course this
assumes that you are
>using the version of MDAC that has the problem.
>When you ping the ip address does the response come back
quickly or dies it
>take some time?
>Rand
>This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and
confers no rights.
>.
>

DMO

Although this is a client side issue (VB.NET) I was wondering if anyone
could help.
I'm iterating through the stored procedures for the names but its missing
some out and duplicating or triplicating others. The count of sprocs is
correct, does this mean that a sql system table is incorrect.
Any ideas?
Thanks
FrankIs it possible that there are mustiple copies of the SP created under
different users? This can happen is someone logs into the DB as a user
without DBO rights, and creates a SP without specifying the DBO prefix as
part of the SP name.
For example, if Frank logs into the DB and creates a SP like this:
CREATE PROCEDURE usp_order_insert
Then there could be 2 different versions of the SP:
DB.frank.usp_order_insert
DB.dbo.usp_order_insert
"Frank Ashley" <a@.a.com> wrote in message
news:%23OSCFYUYFHA.3620@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Although this is a client side issue (VB.NET) I was wondering if anyone
> could help.
> I'm iterating through the stored procedures for the names but its missing
> some out and duplicating or triplicating others. The count of sprocs is
> correct, does this mean that a sql system table is incorrect.
> Any ideas?
> Thanks
> Frank
>|||Thats what I thought at first and in fact the offending sproc was indeed
missing dbo. Even though I fixed this error though it's still not showing
up.
Frank
"JT" <someone@.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23XuiiuVYFHA.3488@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible that there are mustiple copies of the SP created under
> different users? This can happen is someone logs into the DB as a user
> without DBO rights, and creates a SP without specifying the DBO prefix as
> part of the SP name.
> For example, if Frank logs into the DB and creates a SP like this:
> CREATE PROCEDURE usp_order_insert
> Then there could be 2 different versions of the SP:
> DB.frank.usp_order_insert
> DB.dbo.usp_order_insert
> "Frank Ashley" <a@.a.com> wrote in message
> news:%23OSCFYUYFHA.3620@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>|||Did you login as SA or DBO and delete the SPs?
"Frank Ashley" <a@.a.com> wrote in message
news:udq2QhWYFHA.584@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thats what I thought at first and in fact the offending sproc was indeed
> missing dbo. Even though I fixed this error though it's still not showing
> up.
>
> Frank
> "JT" <someone@.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23XuiiuVYFHA.3488@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
as
missing
>|||Yep. Tried that.
"JT" <someone@.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23BudU3WYFHA.2572@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Did you login as SA or DBO and delete the SPs?
> "Frank Ashley" <a@.a.com> wrote in message
> news:udq2QhWYFHA.584@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> as
> missing
>

Distribution licensing

Hi
If I write app with a sql server as backend, what are the licensing
requirements for distribution of the app sql server wise i.e. does the
client need to buy their on sql server ort can I distribute parts of it as
part of my app? I need to use Merge Replication so I doubt I can distribute
the app with sql server express.
Thanks
RegardsIf you use SQL Server Express or MSDE you do not need to have licenses on
the subscribers, but you will need to license the publisher for every
connection made to it. So if you have 300 subscribers you will need 300
Calls.
--
http://www.zetainteractive.com - Shift Happens!
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"John" <John@.nospam.infovis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23GIlwXpKIHA.4752@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> If I write app with a sql server as backend, what are the licensing
> requirements for distribution of the app sql server wise i.e. does the
> client need to buy their on sql server ort can I distribute parts of it as
> part of my app? I need to use Merge Replication so I doubt I can
> distribute the app with sql server express.
> Thanks
> Regards
>
>
>
>

Distributing database with app

Sorry if this something beaten to death already...

What is/should be required for a target client machine to use and connect to a local copy of a SqlExpress database? Can't seem to get a db connection established to a different machine through a VB6 app. Installed the sql native client on the machine, but still can't connect. What am I missing, or do I have to distribute/install the entire SqlExpress client? Working fine from my development machine.

Rick

If you are connecting via TCP/IP you have to enable these protocols. You also have to ensure to enable remote connections.

HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de
|||I'm not using a remote connection. It's a local copy of the database. What simply does the target deployment machine require or in order for the VB app to connect to the db?

|||The deployment machine needs a Data access components like MDAC or SQL Native Client, both the app machine and the database machine must be able to negotiate to a common protocol like TCP/IP. If that is used you have to allow remote connections on the database server and if you are using another port than 1433 either specify that in your connecting string like MachineName\SQLExpress,Portnumber or start SQL Browser on the database server which will automatically redirect the request to the appropiate port.

HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de
|||Thanks Jens. I don't quite understand what you're saying with remote connections. There is no database machine. This is all starting to sound like every target machine for my application requires SqlExpress be installed on that machine, or a server that machine is connected to. Is this correct or not?

|||

Do you have SQL Express installed anywhere?

You must have a SQL Server running in order to access your data. There are two basic models to do this:

Local Data Access - SQL Express is installed on the same computer with the application. Each user has thier own copy of the database installed on their computer and data is not shared. This is the configuration for a single user application.|||Mike ... I was speaking of Local access (and think I used the term "local" a few times). All I've been asking is -- must SqlExpress be installed a client machine, be it local or server? Apparently, the answer is yes, which complicates distribution and installation by end-users who won't have a clue. I was under the mistaken impression it was not unlike distributing an Access mdb file. I'm clear on this point now. Thanks.

Now I'm trying to understand more on User Instance usage:

If not specified in the connection string, what is the default, yes or no?
For shared multiuser usage located on a server, should it be enabled or not?

I'm just unclear on when/when not to use it.

TIA ... Rick

|||If you don′t uise the user instance keyword you use SQL Server Exprtess just as a normal database. If you want to attach the database to a SQL Server instance you don′t need to use User instance availbility. Just attach the db to a SQL Servert (Express) and connect via the "normal* connection string to it (without specifying something like user instance)

HTH, Jens SUessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

|||

Hi Rick,

Regarding User Instances:

If you don't specify it in the connection string, User Instances are not used.

distributing data to client sites...

We have a large SQL database, and we need to send out updated records to many clients' sites which are not connected.

We currently have a tool which looks at the audit log of changes we made, creates a file based on this, which is then emailed to our clients. They then run a tool we created to remerge the changes.

I suspect SQL server replication might make all this possible. Am I right? Can SQL server produce a file automatically which can be applied to a remote database to update the tables as appropriate? From looking at some replication stuff it looks to me like you have to have the servers on the same network.Not necessarily. But your sysadmin needs to know his/her stuff.

Distributed system patterns - SQL Server deployment

DEV ENVIRONMENT: .NET and some COM
DATABASE: SQL Server 2000
CLIENT OS: Win2K, WinXP
SERVER OS: Win2K3
Greetings,
I have a client who insists on having their customers in separate SQL
databases for an online component. I instinctively feel that a consolidated
database for all clients is the "natural" way to implement. Here's the
system setup:
1) Several hundred clients have an n-tier client/server system at THEIR site
(A). They use this system to run their business and serve THEIR customers
(B)
2) We host and operate an online system (C) for these several hundred
clients
that provides an online presence that THEIR customers (B) can use ...
therefore a database now exists at site (A) and at the web site online (C).
These databases get synchronized. Both databases serve the client base (B).
In conclusion, some technical arguments for the one consolidated database at
site (C) are:
i.) Less server resources in terms of database connection pools since these
are usually connect string dependent
ii) Easier reporting (across clients)
iii) Scaling past several hundred clients seems scary (i.e. 1000, 2000, 3000
SQL databases ?)
Proponents for a multiple database scenario have these arguments
i.) Separate SQL Server files (MDB) limit risk of data corruption to 1
client at a time
ii.) Easier to partition if clients ever decided to HOST their own online
presence.
iii) Increased security (perceived or real)
Please provide any feedback or arguments for either side.
Thanks in advance.
Bert Nieves
Software Consultant
bert89@.yahoo.comBert Nieves (bert89@.yahoo.com) writes:
> I have a client who insists on having their customers in separate SQL
> databases for an online component. I instinctively feel that a
> consolidated database for all clients is the "natural" way to implement.
> ...
> In conclusion, some technical arguments for the one consolidated
> database at site (C) are:
> i.) Less server resources in terms of database connection pools since
> these are usually connect string dependent
> ii) Easier reporting (across clients)
> iii) Scaling past several hundred clients seems scary (i.e. 1000, 2000,
> 3000 SQL databases ?)
> Proponents for a multiple database scenario have these arguments
> i.) Separate SQL Server files (MDB) limit risk of data corruption to 1
> client at a time
> ii.) Easier to partition if clients ever decided to HOST their own online
> presence.
> iii) Increased security (perceived or real)
Of these I would consider point ii) of the pro arguments and iii) of the
contra arguments to be the most important.
If you need to do reporting for one client over all their customers, then
one database per customer is not going to be fun. But you could have jobs
which extracts data from the smaller databases into a big reporting
database.
On the other hand, if your client's customers will have access to the
databases themselves, and it is instrumental that these customer cannot
see the slightest of some other customer's data, this a very strong
argument for separate databases. Yes, you can solve this with views,
stored procedures etc, but it takes just one bug to ruin the users'
confidence in the system.
As for scaling, you probably scale better with more databases, because
you can then easily distribute the databases on several boxes.
One thing you don't mention, is that many databases will require more
effort into setting up backup routines etc.
In the end, this is a trade-off between business requirements and cost
of ownership. One big database is probably cheaper - unless the business
requiresments for separating customers from each other is very high.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, sommar@.algonet.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/productdoc/2000/books.asp