Number of Users

Hello,
Need a quick help.
Our SQL 2K server on WIN2K is configured with 10 seat
licenses. "PROCESS INFO" of EM is showing more than 10
(15) users connections. (15 different network addresses).
Why is that?SQL has some connections which are overhead...they do not count... If a user
connects multiple times, that still counts as a single connection.. But if
you are getting 15 different mac addresses - that is interesting..
Make sure license manager is running.
Check the NT event log to see if there are license violation messages.
(check SQL log as well.)
Lastly using SQL enterprise manager, check the number of connections, the
default is unlimited, you may wish to lower it.
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Computer Education Services Corporation (CESC), Charlotte, NC
www.computeredservices.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"dennis" <dennis_marco@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:060901c3814a$3e3c5450$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> Need a quick help.
> Our SQL 2K server on WIN2K is configured with 10 seat
> licenses. "PROCESS INFO" of EM is showing more than 10
> (15) users connections. (15 different network addresses).
> Why is that?

Null key field in Oracle EBusiness Suite

I am trying to process a table that is part of Oracle eBusiness Suite using the Microsoft driver for Oracle.

The table has four "key" fields (key fields do not strictly exist in eBusiness Suite, but when I add the Data Source tables, this particular table is interpreted as having four key fields.

One of the key fields can have a null value.

Whet I fill the table, only those rows where all of the key fields have values are read, i.e. the rows where one of the key fields is null are NOT brought into the table.

There are no selection criteria, and the query simply reads:

SELECT * FROM MTL_CROSS_REFERENCES

The data is correctly read if I use the data source trough ODBC from Access.

If I move a copy of the table to SQLServer the table also reads correctly.

Is this a bug?

Please file a bug:

http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/productfeedback/default.aspx

Thanks