SQL Server - 我“真正”需要多少用户？
我正在设置一个应用程序，并且正在考虑购买 SQL Server 的许可证。我的问题非常简单（尽管可能有一个复杂的答案...）
对于 SQL Server，我真正需要多少个用户帐户？
在我看来，我会提供一个主管理帐户，也许是 2 或 3 个用户帐户，然后是一个基于应用程序的帐户。
我的应用程序可能有大约 30-40 个用户，极少数情况下有 4-5 人同时用户。但正如我所见，我设置了一个包含 30-40 个帐户的 BLL，并且 BLL 将具有 SQL 帐户，所有 30 个帐户都将使用该帐户来查询数据库......
我只是想知道人们的承担这个是。这是要走的路吗，还是我对建筑的理解有误？
I'm setting up an application, and I'm looking into purchasing a license for SQL Server. My question is pretty simple (though may have a complicated answer...)
How many users accounts do I really need, for SQL Server?
The way I see it, I'd give one master administration account, maybe 2 or 3 user accounts, and then one application-based account.
My application will likely have about 30-40 users, with the rare possibility of having 4-5 people being simultaneous users. But as I see it, I'd set up a BLL with the 30-40 accounts - and the BLL would have the SQL account, that all 30 accounts would use to query the DB through...
I'm just wondering what people's take on this is. Is that the way to go, or do I have the wrong idea of architecture here?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（7）
您的情况称为多路复用，并包含在特殊注意事项< /a> 使用中间件、事务服务器和多层架构：
底线：您需要为每个用户提供一个 CAL，总共 35-45 个许可证。
Your case is called Multiplexing ans is covered in the special considerations Using Middleware, Transaction Servers, and Multitiered Architecture:
Bottom line: you need one CAL for every user, to a toal of 35-45 licenses.
我的理解是，您需要为每个使用 SQL Server 的不同用户或设备提供 CAL，因此在您的情况下需要 30-40 个用户或设备。帐户只是针对服务器进行身份验证的一组凭据，而用户则是一袋肉。许可一袋肉，而不是账户。
但这是一个容易被误解的领域，我建议联系 Microsoft 许可以了解真正的情况。
My understanding is that you need a CAL for every distinct user or device that utilises the SQL Server so 30-40 in your case. Accounts are just sets of credentials that authenticate against the server, whereas users are sacks of meat. License sacks of meat, not accounts.
It's an easily misundertood area though and I would advise contacting Microsoft Licensing to find out the real deal.
您确实知道SQL Express 2005/2008<的商业用途< /a> 是允许的并且可能非常适合您的场景？
如果需要，您可以随时升级到标准版。
有关 MS SQL Server 版本的比较，请查看此处 。它还包括它们的局限性。我相信对于您的场景，SQL Server Express 会做得很好（前提是您的数据库不大于 4GB）。
You do know that commercial use of SQL Express 2005/2008 is allowed and may be perfectly suitable for your scenario?
You can always upgrade at any time to Standard Edition should you need it.
For a comparison of the editions of MS SQL Server check here. It also includes their limitations. I am convinced that for your scenario SQL Server Express would do very nicely (provided your DB is not bigger than 4GB).
简单的答案是...
您需要为连接到 SQL Server 的每个不同用户或设备提供 CAL，无论最终用户和 SQL Server 安装之间的“多路复用”或 Web 服务器或代理如何。
如果您无法对它们进行物理计数和量化（例如公共网站），则需要处理器许可证。
更多...
我的建议：与 MS 或在您的商店中处理您的许可证的任何人联系。您至少已经与微软就操作系统和 Office 达成了协议。
The simple answer is...
You need a CAL for every distinct user or device that connects to SQL Server, regardless of "multiplexing" or web server or proxy between end user and SQL Server install.
If you can't physically count and quantify them (eg public web site), you need processor licenses.
More...
My advice: talk to MS or whoever deals with your licenses in your shop. You'll already have an agreement with MS for the OS and Office at least.
如果您的应用程序依赖于将许多用户代理到 SQL Server 实例的 BLL，那么我认为您无法根据帐户数量获得许可证。
Microsoft 会告诉您需要每个处理器的许可证。
（这比购买 30-40 个 CAL 许可证便宜）
If your application relies on a BLL which proxies many users onto the SQL Server instance, then I think you can't get a license based on number of accounts.
Microsoft will tell you that you need a per-processor license.
(And that's cheaper than buying 30-40 CAL licenses)
以下是 MS Sql Server 常见问题解答的内容：
对于外部关注的服务器应用程序。对于外部服务器应用程序（例如 Internet 和 Extranet 场景）来说，处理器许可是更好的选择。在这些场景中，通常很难对设备或用户进行计数，因此基于硬件的定价更加简单。
适用于混合用途服务器。对于从组织防火墙内部和外部访问的混合用途服务器，处理器许可通常是有利的。由于外部用户可能需要处理器许可证，因此无需通过 CAL 为内部用户单独购买访问权限。
适用于防火墙内的环境。对于客户端与服务器处理器比率相对较低的防火墙内环境，如果每个设备有多个用户（例如，在呼叫中心），则服务器加设备 CAL 许可模式可能是更具成本效益的选择，而如果每个用户有多个设备，服务器加用户 CAL 许可模式可能会更具成本效益。对于客户端与服务器处理器比率较高的防火墙内环境，处理器许可模型可能更具成本效益。
Here's what the MS Sql Server FAQ says:
For externally focused server applications. Processor licensing is a better choice for externally focused server applications, such as Internet and extranet scenarios. It is often difficult to count devices or users in these scenarios, so hardware-based pricing is more straightforward.
For mixed-use servers. For mixed-use servers that will be accessed from both inside and outside the organization's firewall, processor licensing is generally favorable. Because the processor licenses are probably needed for external users, there would be no need to purchase access separately for internal users through CALs.
For environments inside the firewall. For environments inside the firewall where client-to-server processor ratios are relatively low, the server plus device CAL licensing model will likely be the more cost-effective choice if there are multiple users per device (for example, in a call center), while the server plus user CAL licensing model will likely be more cost-effective if there are multiple devices per user. For environments inside the firewall where client-to-server processor ratios are high, the processor licensing model will likely be more cost-effective.
除非你用 做一些棘手的事情代理认证&审核您将只能登录该应用程序。否则，我会按处理器进行许可。
Unless you do something tricky with proxy authentication & auditing you will only have a login for the application. Otherwise, I would license by processor.