Home Server
New Blog Posts: Merging Reports - Part 1 and Part 2

Licensing for Desktop

edited October 2002 in Server
When we first heard of RB Server Edition we had
a different understanding on what the Server Edition
could be used.

Our strategy would be to run 'a' report server on
the same desktop pc that the client runs.

In other words, it's nice to have support for
IntraWeb and InterNet reporting, our intention
though is to detach the reports from our main
application to a separate report application.
The main app would then request a report from
the server by a mean of a desktop protocol,
since tcp/ip should not be required on a reqular
desktop pc.

Our goal is to split the tasks by a technical
mean, not by the means of different areas or
places.

However, the current licensing model is not suitable
for such a solution since it would force us to
buy hundreds of licenses.

Are there any considerations re licensing when
the report server run's on the same cpu as the
client does?

best regards,

Thomas Lohrum.

Comments

  • edited October 2002
    Hi Thomas,

    I created a report 'server' for my application as a standard exe and let it run on the same machine. If you prefer this kind of reporting then you don't need the server edition.
    The server edition can be used as a real server solution (intraWeb and/or WEB), therefore tcp/ip is needed.

    --
    regards,
    Chris Ueberall;
  • edited October 2002
    Thank you Chris.

    How does your application communicate with the server?

    (a) how do you pass parameters to the server, e.g. get report 'customer' for
    custid=4711?

    (b) how does the server return it's output to the client (your application)?

    Thomas.
  • edited October 2002
    Hi Thomas,


    see my comments inline.


    with simple WM_COPYDATA messages, but there are several other ways.


    see above.


    since the main task of my report 'server' is to display reports, the output device isn't my application but the screen resp. the printer.

    --
    regards,
    Chris Ueberall;
This discussion has been closed.