Posted by Jens Dahlin on 22-Feb-2011 02:26

I have a hard time trying to find out if we actually meet all licensing requirements and if we are optimal (in the sence that we use the best model for ourself).

What we have:

(1) A number of users sitting by their own desktop computers accessing our database via the Client Networking license. These do not run via an Appserver but are connected directly to the database.

(2) A number of unnamed users accessing our website using what was formely known as WebSpeed (AppServer Transaction Server).

(3) One to two batches running concurrent on different times of the day.

(4) A database with both Concurrent Users and Access Agents licensed.

So does concurrent users match up to (1) and access agents to (2)?

Do I need separate client licenses for batches?

Could I switch to concurrent users only for a simpler model (and cheaper)?

All Replies

Posted by kevin_saunders on 22-Feb-2011 03:10

The simle answers are:

Yes in your example, concurrent users are cleint server and access agents are the WebSpeed clients.

No, batch clients are not counted towards license counts, unless they exceed the number of concurrent/named user/registerd device licenses, at which point the 'extra' batch clients will need a license.

No, you cannot. The Access Agent license is there because you cannot control how many 'potential' users there are of your WebSpeed application (assuming, of course, that the WebSpeed application is world facing, and not an internal application with limited users).

Posted by Thomas Mercer-Hursh on 22-Feb-2011 11:39

Progress version is important in answering any licensing question.  There are a number of different options in 10.x than exist in 9.x.

Posted by Jens Dahlin on 23-Feb-2011 00:41

This is 10.2 (upgraded from 9)

Posted by kevin_saunders on 23-Feb-2011 03:51

Agreed, but considering Jens mentions 'Access Agent' in his original post, I assumed 10.x+ as that is when it was introduced..

Posted by Thomas Mercer-Hursh on 23-Feb-2011 12:19

Yes, but there was an AppServer agent pricing in 9 and the concurrent  user aspect made me wonder if that was what was meant rather than the  newer version.

If I recall correctly, Access Agent is intended only for users which are not logged in (you have that) and which are using the application less than 2 hours a week.  If that is what you have, then probably concurrent user would *not* be cheaper because "user" is person sitting in front of a device, not the number of actual DB connections.  So, if you have a webspeed agent which is taking care of 10 currently active users, but only has one DB connection, that is 10 users, not one.

Your other options in 10.x are registered client and named user which license devices and people respectively.  The former is good if you have one device shared by a lot of people, like a shop floor terminal, and the later is good if you have more devices than people.  These two are both cheaper than concurrent user so you have to look at your specific circumstances pretty closely.  If you have a fixed number of people who log on in the morning and stay logged in all day and then everyone goes home, then one of these models might be good for you since the number of devices/people served is basically the same as the number of concurrent users.  But, if you have a larger pool of users, each with their own device, who log in an out for various periods in the day, then concurrent users might be quite a bit less.  Remember, though, that you are licensing for peaks so if everyone logs in for an hour first thing in the morning, that is what you need to license, even if the pattern is spotty during the rest of the day.

The .lic file should give you some clues, although you need to interpret it according to the different user models.

This thread is closed