Hmmm,
My 2 cents. It has been my understanding from the beggining of XP and
other Win OS's that the desktop OS's have always had a 10 connection
limitation. Using patches/hacks to overcome a security feature(according
to MS) is a no no because every time there is a patch, you will have to
re-aply the hack which may not even work.
Since XP is not built for networked optimization in comparison to any
server version of the OS, why would you want to use any Win Desktop
OS's? There are tremendous benefit on using Server class OS's. If the
cost of ownership of the server class OS's is too much look in to a
Linux based solution.
If it is cost, use a Linux implementation as it will possibly require
less resources, less maintenance and cost the same for MySQL
licensing(incase is a commercial app).
Fargo Holiday wrote:
Yeah, MS SQL Server, the application/service, handles it just fine.
But if you run that service on a regular XP machine, Home or Pro with
SP2, it will only allow 10 concurrent tcp sessions. You'll be able to
note that by looking in the event viewer, under System, as it throws
warnings about tcp/ip. Most applications are smart enough to simply
retry until they either timeout or get through.
Long story short, don't find yourself thinking that an application
somehow overrides the tcp/ip stack that the OS presents. If the tcp/ip
stack is set up to only allow x number of connections at a time,
that's what you're going to get. This limitation isn't present on
other versions of the OS, such as 2000 or server 2003, so naturally if
you're connecting from an XP client to a server running a DB, then
there isn't likely to be all that many connections going on at once.
Anyway, take from it what you will.
Ruslan Zasukhin wrote:
From: Fargo Holiday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 10:49:30 -0800
In general I'd agree with Trausti, but one thing to consider is that
XP,
since service pack two, only allows 10 tcp connections at a time,
unless
someone has applied a 3rd party patch, like Lvllord's, and even then
that limit is re-imposed with most of the security updates that come
from Windows updates. I don't know what behavior this could cause,
since, last I looked, it wasn't a very well documented behavior.
However, on the anecdotal side, a client of mine (I do freelance
computer and network support/design) switched his workstations to XP
from 98 and was losing connections to printers. He has 6 printers, and
anytime the tcp limit was reached, one or more of the printers would be
taken offline and you'd have to re-establish the connection manually.
Anyway, simply because of this, I'd suggest using a more dynamic
connect->payload->disconnect sort of approach.
May be this is Windows itself approach, but this should not affect of
course
DBMS servers. E.g. MS SQL SERVER with sure can handle more than 10
connections :-)
The same for Valentina Server.
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
