Hello Pervasive group...

My client has 50 computers, each generates 100 transactions/entries per hour.

Rightnow Package has microsoft Access(97) tables as backend. Package is not browserbased.

We are planning to convert MDB(97) to pervasive sql tables with stored procedures and triggers.

Does pervasive supports such large workgroup based applications ?
or it insist that after 6 workgroup computers, the package should be based on Client-Server architecture?

Has anyone tried such applications on pervasive workgroup engines?

This query is posted because for online purchasing of workgroup engines flashes a message 'Maximum quantity per item is 20'

https://www.pervasive.com/ecommerce/Scripts/cart.asp


Thanks in advance

CDTamhankar

The Workgroup is limited to 5 users. If the customer has 50 users, the server engine would be a much better choice.
The Workgroup engine is designed for small peer-to-peer networks. The Server engine won't even break a sweat with 50 users and 100 transactions/entries per hour.
One thing to be aware of, triggers and stored procedures won't help with performance and will impose some limitations (triggers disable Btrieve/Transactional access for the operation).

If max. 5 is the criteria then how come pervasive is selling additional users count licences for workgroup engine?

Compared to workgroup engine, server engine is very costly and certainly the incremental cost for server engine of 20 users is provibitive.

Pervasive workgroup engine should support 30-35 concurrent users with workgroup engine.

Buying os server edition should be based on response time, reliability od data base and not just the user count. If response is poor, then, I will not buying server edition, but, max 5 is a very tough restriction.

Am I talking rational?

-CDTamhankar

Where do you see additional user counts for the WOrkgroup engine? I only see the one user count license ($25) at https://www.pervasive.com/ecommerce/...?idCategory=43.

Why should the workgroup support 30-35 concurrent users? The WGE runs as a user process while the server engine runs as a server. If you're concerned about the cost of an OS, use Linux. Pervasive has a Linux server version too.

I don't understand your comment about response time and reliability. Don't you think the Workgroup should be reliable (not corrupt data) and have good response time?

The workgroup has had the 5 user limitation for quite some time (since the release of PSQL 2000. This is not a new limitation and there are a lot of customers using it successfully but when you need more users (like 50), the server engine is just a better choice because it scales better and handles multiple users better and runs as a server and isn't reliant on a user being logged in.

"Where do you see additional user counts for the WOrkgroup engine"
http://www.developer-solutions.co.uk...?PublisherID=8

Pervasive SQL v9 User Count Increase
Pervasive SQL v9 6 User Count Increase Windows or Netware £490
Pervasive SQL v9 10 User Count Increase Windows or Netware £720
Pervasive SQL v9 20 User Count Increase Windows or Netware £1310
Pervasive SQL v9 Workgroup
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - Single Seat £20
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - 10 Seat £165
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - 25 Seat £360
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - 100 Seat £1310
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - 1000 Seat £9845
Pervasive.SQL V8 Workgroup
Pervasive.SQL V8 Workgroup - Single Seat £20
Pervasive.SQL V8 Workgroup - 25 Seat £430
Pervasive.SQL V8 Workgroup - 100 Seat £1575

Sir, Have I misunderstood the terminology?

Yes. THose workgroup engines are deployment licenses. It's 1000 seats that can be distributed to multiple computers in blocks of 1 - 5 users.

Mirtheil, Thank you very much for prompt replies!!!!

Dont get annoyed for my ignorance, this is my first interaction with pervasive software.

Mirtheil wrote :
"Where do you see additional user counts for the WOrkgroup engine"

I had an seen website of pervasive's distributor

http://www.developer-solutions.co.uk...?PublisherID=8[COLOR="Red"]

My client had received similar pdf file from pervasive around 18 months back.

Pervasive SQL v9 User Count Increase
Pervasive SQL v9 6 User Count Increase Windows £490
Pervasive SQL v9 10 User Count Increase Windows £720
Pervasive SQL v9 20 User Count Increase Windows £1310

Pervasive SQL v9 Workgroup
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - Single Seat £20
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - 10 Seat £165
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - 25 Seat £360
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - 100 Seat £1310
Pervasive v9 Workgroup - 1000 Seat £9845

Pervasive.SQL V8 Workgroup
Pervasive.SQL V8 Workgroup - Single Seat £20
Pervasive.SQL V8 Workgroup - 25 Seat £430
Pervasive.SQL V8 Workgroup - 100 Seat £1575

I hope that 1000 seat licence is not a deployment licence.

I expect that companiy which purchases 1000 seat workgroup engine will not restrict that only 5 concurrent users for a perticular database.

Have I misunderstood this price list? ....
Sorry... if I am wrong in interpreting pervasives terminology.

My client and myself had decided to opt for pervasive, as per seat cost for workgroup engine is very low and resonable.

cost of 50 user licence = 2x25 user licence = 2 x 360 = £ 720.
(So efectively cost per computer less than £ 13)

where as for 50 usr server engine will cost £ 3020
(So efectively cost per computer more than £ 60 )

Client has existing setup with MS 2003 server and XP terminals. So switching over to LINUX is not required.
Its not the cost of OS but huge difference in engine cost ( £13 against £60 ) was one of the key factors in favoring for V9 workgroup engine.
( Fortunately V9 is cheaper than V8 )

I 100% agree with you that workgroup and sever engine should be equally be efficent in response time as well as reliability.

I once again preseme that server engine will have more powerful logic in solving dead-lock situations. So if I fine that response time is not acceptable then we have no alternative than to switchover to server engine ( and fortunately again pervasive charges only incremental cost )

As a developer I will certainly go for server engine. But I simply can not over-rule my client's decisions. I can influence the client but can not take decision against its wish.

Next time onwards I will have more clear visions about pervasive products.

Thanks
-CDTamhankar

Sorry, I replied earlier..... for same query.

My client would have cancelled my contract for this mistake.

Still I have a query....
What will happen if my clent purchases 25 user licence and apllies to his own setup. Will WG engine accept such licence with such high (25 ) user count?

If you have such licence, can you try, or its against pervasive principles?

If this is successful, then, I will certainly develop a benchmark program to test
WG engine for 10,20,25 concurrent users?

Looks like I have to spare 1000 bucks for this try... lets see how soon I do this, I will keep my findings posted....

Thanks you once again
CDTamhankar

Hi All,

cdt I would be very interested to know what you find with this query as we too would like to use the workgroup engine for installations above 5 users say up to 25 seems quite reasonable. Am i correct in thinking that there is no way to use more than 5 users with the workgroup engine? and the 100 seat license can only be used for 20 seperate 5 user installs ?
If thats the case thats not too good, if you have an application that only stores little data but needs say 10 users it seems crazy to have to buy the the full c/server version.
If this is Pervasive's idea of forcing people to spend out on c/server its a bad one, much better to let people use workgroup engine up to its limits (at least that gets people into Pervasive) and then they can migrate the c/server when the need is genuinely there. If the 5 user limit is correct then that just pushes people to look at alternative db's.

Avrenim,
As I explained, the Workgroup engine is limited to 5 users. This is not new. This has been the case since PSQL 2000 (PSQL 7 only had a workstation engine that was limited to 1 user). Btrieve V6.15 was the last version to support unlimited workgroup connections. Btrieve V6.15 WGE used MEFS (Multi-Engine File Sharing) and was not very reliable with multiple users. There were file corruption issues with MEFS. That's why it was removed.
Based on my 10+ years of work with PSQL, if a site has more than 5 users, they usually have a server and the server engine is the better choice. The server engine runs as a service on Windows (or NLM on NetWare, or daemon on Linux). THe Workgroup engine runs as a User Process and requires a user to be logged in on the system. If that user then logs out, all other users lose connections to the engine. This is why the WGE is designed for 5 users (or less).
THe deployment licenses are exactly that. You can break up the 100 user license in 1 to 5 user groups.
I've not found that the 5 user limit has pushed anyone to alternative Databases.

Thank you Mr Arvenim for edorsing my views.

Mr Mertheil yor prompt replies has helped me & my client... thanks a lot


If file corruption or data corruption is the issue then, my client ( or any sensible person ) will not opt WGE.

Instead of solving file corruption associated with MEFS, Pervasive has found simple escape root of restricting WG to 5 users.

I have received an email from a btrieve 6.15 user stating that he is not upgrading to PSQL-8 due to these restrictions.

25-50 WG is a huge market base. Pervasive has to cater the need of such customers. ( 40-50 WG computers and not massive transactions ). Evantually these installations will opt for server editions, when their business grows.
But MAX-5 is VERY VERY strict restriction.

My client will certainly ask me to try for MySql or MS-Access-2000x.
My interaction for pervasive WG ends here.

--C D Tamhankar

If you really want this to change, then you need to talk to Pervasive directly. Speficially you need to talk to a sales rep. If Pervasive sees the need (large customers asking) for a 20 user WGE, they may consider it..

Thanks mirtheil for clarfying the situation. Hopefully Pervasive will see there is market for a larger user licenses for its workgroup and that it might not lower the demand for the server version.

Just another question along similar lines, if we create a trial version of our software and it uses pervasive as its db, how do we approach that as we would not want to use up workgroup licenses unless the client decides to purchase our app. They may trial it for up to 50 days. Is the older 6.15 distributable royalty free ?

Well, 50 days is longer than the Pervasive trial (it's 30 days) so unless you can convince Pervasive to give you a longer trial key, you're probably going to have to send a full license key and then uninstall the Pervasive engine when the trial ends (unless the user purchases the software).

Thanks again for your speedy reply. 30 days would probably cover us for most instances.

With regard the old 6.15 workgroup engine, can that be distributed royalty free ? I remember for example in old versions of vb4 you could connect to (and create using visdata) a btrieve database but in order for it be accessed you needed some of the old btreive 'W' files. Can these btrieve 'W' files can be deployed royalty free ?