I was wondering if anyone knew of any limitations to using Windows XP as a File and SQL server. I am asking because one of the applications we sell, requires the customer to setup a server for filesharing and as a SQL Server. We already allow them to use SQL Express, but we wanted to see if we can suggest Windows XP as a low cost alternative to Windows Server. The only potential problem that I could see if there were limits on the number of concurrent connections to either the files or the database. We are only thinking of recommending this for smaller sized companies who would have 10-15 users.
我想知道是否有人知道使用Windows XP作为文件和SQL服务器的任何限制。我问,因为我们销售的应用程序之一,要求客户设置文件共享服务器和SQL Server。我们已经允许他们使用SQL Express,但我们希望看看我们是否可以建议Windows XP作为Windows Server的低成本替代品。如果对文件或数据库的并发连接数有限制,我可以看到唯一的潜在问题。我们只考虑为拥有10-15名用户的小型公司推荐此产品。
9 个解决方案
#1
9
There is a limit of 10 inbound connections on XP professional, and 5 on XP Home. So it would only be practicable for a very small company.
XP专业版上有10个入站连接,XP Home上有5个入站连接。所以这对一家非常小的公司来说是切实可行的。
#2
3
From this MS KB Article:
从这篇MS KB文章:
Note For Windows XP Professional, the maximum number of other computers that are permitted to simultaneously connect over the network is ten. This limit includes all transports and resource sharing protocols combined. For Windows XP Home Edition, the maximum number of other computers that are permitted to simultaneously connect over the network is five. This limit is the number of simultaneous sessions from other computers the system is permitted to host. This limit does not apply to the use of administrative tools that attach from a remote computer.
注意对于Windows XP Professional,允许通过网络同时连接的其他计算机的最大数量为10。此限制包括所有传输和资源共享协议的组合。对于Windows XP Home Edition,允许通过网络同时连接的其他计算机的最大数量为5。此限制是允许系统承载的其他计算机的同时会话数。此限制不适用于使用从远程计算机连接的管理工具。
Per development: The connection limit refers to the number of redirector-based connections and is enforced for any file, print, named pipe, or mail slot session. The TCP connection limit is not enforced, but it may be bound by legal agreement to not permit more than 10 clients.
每次开发:连接限制是指基于重定向器的连接数,并强制执行任何文件,打印,命名管道或邮件插槽会话。 TCP连接限制未强制执行,但可能受法律协议约束,不允许超过10个客户端。
I suggest reading the kb article for more information.
我建议阅读kb文章了解更多信息。
#3
1
Actually, you can run SQL Server Standard or Workgroup Edition on Windows XP Pro. It is not limited to the express version ...
实际上,您可以在Windows XP Pro上运行SQL Server Standard或Workgroup Edition。它不仅限于快递版......
#4
0
One cost effective alternative is Windows Small Business Server. SBS 2003 R2: Features at a Glance
Windows Small Business Server是一种经济高效的替代方案。 SBS 2003 R2:功能一览
#5
0
This will break the EULA.
这将打破EULA。
Here is the relevant knowledge base article. Note that while TCP connection limits are not enforced for XP, legally they are limited to 10 connections.
这是相关的知识库文章。请注意,虽然不对XP强制实施TCP连接限制,但从法律上讲,它们仅限于10个连接。
Small business server seems like a better fit, and is cost effective if you shop around.
小型企业服务器似乎更合适,如果您到处购物,则具有成本效益。
#6
0
The problem with Small Business Server is all the frill it comes with that is unnecessary for a simple file and sql server; like exchange server, sharepoint, etc. I've used Windows XP as a small business SQL/File server, but as others have pointed out, you are limited to 10 connections legally speaking.
Small Business Server的问题就是它带来的所有褶边,对于简单的文件和sql server来说是不必要的;比如Exchange服务器,sharepoint等。我已经将Windows XP用作小型企业SQL /文件服务器,但正如其他人所指出的那样,从法律角度来说,你只能使用10个连接。
#7
0
Another issue with Small Business Server is it can't be installed on an existing domain. Your best bet would be to package the SQL Server portion around a normal Windows server installation. If you're looking at 10-15 users, there's no guarantee that they have a domain. But if they don't, likely they are already dealing with the file server problem using accounts with same usernames/passwords on the file server(s) as on their individual workstations.
Small Business Server的另一个问题是它无法安装在现有域上。您最好的选择是将SQL Server部分打包到正常的Windows服务器安装周围。如果您正在查看10-15个用户,则无法保证他们拥有域名。但如果他们不这样做,他们可能已经在使用文件服务器上具有相同用户名/密码的帐户处理文件服务器问题,就像他们各自的工作站一样。
#8
-1
The number of connections is not related to SQL Server edition, but to the operating system. For example, Windows XP allows only 10 concurrent connections, Windows 7 20. For Windows Server OS [no need to purchase any new server machine ], the number of connections is unlimited (but you can limit is using Terminal Services). The error message shown in case of connection limit reached is something like "the security limit reached...the number of concurrent connect attempts"
连接数与SQL Server版本无关,而与操作系统无关。例如,Windows XP仅允许10个并发连接,Windows 7 20.对于Windows Server OS [无需购买任何新的服务器计算机],连接数量不受限制(但您可以限制使用终端服务)。达到连接限制时显示的错误消息类似于“达到安全限制...并发连接尝试次数”
#9
-3
Presumably you are meaning SQL Express, as you can't run SQL Server on XP, it's a server product.
大概你是SQL Express的意思,因为你不能在XP上运行SQL Server,它是一个服务器产品。
If the customer can afford your product, they can afford a copy of Server 2003, or whatever, the file sharing's built-in. Admittedly SQL Server's fairly expensive, but if your product needs it, that's the way it goes. If cost were an issue, you shouldn't be using SQL Server as the database platform. There's no point in trying to force a server-based solution into a client OS. You'll end up with all sorts of problems before long.
如果客户能够负担得起您的产品,他们可以负担文件共享内置的Server 2003或其他任何副本。诚然,SQL Server相当昂贵,但如果您的产品需要它,那就是它的方式。如果成本是个问题,则不应将SQL Server用作数据库平台。试图将基于服务器的解决方案强制转换为客户端操作系统是没有意义的。不久之后你会遇到各种各样的问题。
Doesn't the client have a domain-based infrastructure already?
客户端是否已经拥有基于域的基础架构?
The upshot being being if the client has 5-10 users of the software, they should be on SBS anyway for a variety of other reasons. You don't get SQL Server with it though.
结果是如果客户有5-10个软件用户,他们应该出于各种其他原因而在SBS上。但是你没有得到SQL Server。
(Samba would be an option for file-sharing, but doubtless more expensive than simply buying Server 2003 in this instance).
(Samba将是文件共享的一种选择,但无疑比在这种情况下简单地购买Server 2003更昂贵)。
#1
9
There is a limit of 10 inbound connections on XP professional, and 5 on XP Home. So it would only be practicable for a very small company.
XP专业版上有10个入站连接,XP Home上有5个入站连接。所以这对一家非常小的公司来说是切实可行的。
#2
3
From this MS KB Article:
从这篇MS KB文章:
Note For Windows XP Professional, the maximum number of other computers that are permitted to simultaneously connect over the network is ten. This limit includes all transports and resource sharing protocols combined. For Windows XP Home Edition, the maximum number of other computers that are permitted to simultaneously connect over the network is five. This limit is the number of simultaneous sessions from other computers the system is permitted to host. This limit does not apply to the use of administrative tools that attach from a remote computer.
注意对于Windows XP Professional,允许通过网络同时连接的其他计算机的最大数量为10。此限制包括所有传输和资源共享协议的组合。对于Windows XP Home Edition,允许通过网络同时连接的其他计算机的最大数量为5。此限制是允许系统承载的其他计算机的同时会话数。此限制不适用于使用从远程计算机连接的管理工具。
Per development: The connection limit refers to the number of redirector-based connections and is enforced for any file, print, named pipe, or mail slot session. The TCP connection limit is not enforced, but it may be bound by legal agreement to not permit more than 10 clients.
每次开发:连接限制是指基于重定向器的连接数,并强制执行任何文件,打印,命名管道或邮件插槽会话。 TCP连接限制未强制执行,但可能受法律协议约束,不允许超过10个客户端。
I suggest reading the kb article for more information.
我建议阅读kb文章了解更多信息。
#3
1
Actually, you can run SQL Server Standard or Workgroup Edition on Windows XP Pro. It is not limited to the express version ...
实际上,您可以在Windows XP Pro上运行SQL Server Standard或Workgroup Edition。它不仅限于快递版......
#4
0
One cost effective alternative is Windows Small Business Server. SBS 2003 R2: Features at a Glance
Windows Small Business Server是一种经济高效的替代方案。 SBS 2003 R2:功能一览
#5
0
This will break the EULA.
这将打破EULA。
Here is the relevant knowledge base article. Note that while TCP connection limits are not enforced for XP, legally they are limited to 10 connections.
这是相关的知识库文章。请注意,虽然不对XP强制实施TCP连接限制,但从法律上讲,它们仅限于10个连接。
Small business server seems like a better fit, and is cost effective if you shop around.
小型企业服务器似乎更合适,如果您到处购物,则具有成本效益。
#6
0
The problem with Small Business Server is all the frill it comes with that is unnecessary for a simple file and sql server; like exchange server, sharepoint, etc. I've used Windows XP as a small business SQL/File server, but as others have pointed out, you are limited to 10 connections legally speaking.
Small Business Server的问题就是它带来的所有褶边,对于简单的文件和sql server来说是不必要的;比如Exchange服务器,sharepoint等。我已经将Windows XP用作小型企业SQL /文件服务器,但正如其他人所指出的那样,从法律角度来说,你只能使用10个连接。
#7
0
Another issue with Small Business Server is it can't be installed on an existing domain. Your best bet would be to package the SQL Server portion around a normal Windows server installation. If you're looking at 10-15 users, there's no guarantee that they have a domain. But if they don't, likely they are already dealing with the file server problem using accounts with same usernames/passwords on the file server(s) as on their individual workstations.
Small Business Server的另一个问题是它无法安装在现有域上。您最好的选择是将SQL Server部分打包到正常的Windows服务器安装周围。如果您正在查看10-15个用户,则无法保证他们拥有域名。但如果他们不这样做,他们可能已经在使用文件服务器上具有相同用户名/密码的帐户处理文件服务器问题,就像他们各自的工作站一样。
#8
-1
The number of connections is not related to SQL Server edition, but to the operating system. For example, Windows XP allows only 10 concurrent connections, Windows 7 20. For Windows Server OS [no need to purchase any new server machine ], the number of connections is unlimited (but you can limit is using Terminal Services). The error message shown in case of connection limit reached is something like "the security limit reached...the number of concurrent connect attempts"
连接数与SQL Server版本无关,而与操作系统无关。例如,Windows XP仅允许10个并发连接,Windows 7 20.对于Windows Server OS [无需购买任何新的服务器计算机],连接数量不受限制(但您可以限制使用终端服务)。达到连接限制时显示的错误消息类似于“达到安全限制...并发连接尝试次数”
#9
-3
Presumably you are meaning SQL Express, as you can't run SQL Server on XP, it's a server product.
大概你是SQL Express的意思,因为你不能在XP上运行SQL Server,它是一个服务器产品。
If the customer can afford your product, they can afford a copy of Server 2003, or whatever, the file sharing's built-in. Admittedly SQL Server's fairly expensive, but if your product needs it, that's the way it goes. If cost were an issue, you shouldn't be using SQL Server as the database platform. There's no point in trying to force a server-based solution into a client OS. You'll end up with all sorts of problems before long.
如果客户能够负担得起您的产品,他们可以负担文件共享内置的Server 2003或其他任何副本。诚然,SQL Server相当昂贵,但如果您的产品需要它,那就是它的方式。如果成本是个问题,则不应将SQL Server用作数据库平台。试图将基于服务器的解决方案强制转换为客户端操作系统是没有意义的。不久之后你会遇到各种各样的问题。
Doesn't the client have a domain-based infrastructure already?
客户端是否已经拥有基于域的基础架构?
The upshot being being if the client has 5-10 users of the software, they should be on SBS anyway for a variety of other reasons. You don't get SQL Server with it though.
结果是如果客户有5-10个软件用户,他们应该出于各种其他原因而在SBS上。但是你没有得到SQL Server。
(Samba would be an option for file-sharing, but doubtless more expensive than simply buying Server 2003 in this instance).
(Samba将是文件共享的一种选择,但无疑比在这种情况下简单地购买Server 2003更昂贵)。