This website uses cookies. By clicking Accept, you consent to the use of cookies. Click Here to learn more about how we use cookies.
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
- Revenera Community
- :
- FlexNet Publisher
- :
- FlexNet Publisher Forum
- :
- Getting -4, MAX_USERS (multiple license servers)
Subscribe
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎Dec 01, 2008
02:08 AM
Getting -4, MAX_USERS (multiple license servers)
I'm getting -4 MAX_USERS. "Licensed number of users already reached." when trying to checkout a license even though there are more floating counted concurrent licenses available in an other license server (server2).
In this case we have 2 clients on different PC's and 1 feature (client.base) in each license server. The first one has a license checked out on lic. server1. The second client then tries to checkout the license (lic. server path: @server1;@server2).
Note that the client correctly proceeds to server2 of there is no license available in server1.
In this case we have 2 clients on different PC's and 1 feature (client.base) in each license server. The first one has a license checked out on lic. server1. The second client then tries to checkout the license (lic. server path: @server1;@server2).
Note that the client correctly proceeds to server2 of there is no license available in server1.
(4) Replies
- Mark as New
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎Dec 01, 2008
10:43 AM
For an explanation and possible remedy, please see, for example, the ProgRef-LF.pdf section "Comparing License Search Path Redundancy to Three-Server Redundancy"; the issue is sometimes that a successful checkout request from a server binds the job handle to that server.
Edit: Oh, I didn't see that the checkouts were from different clients. I assume the first server debug log doesn't say anything unusual...
Edit: Oh, I didn't see that the checkouts were from different clients. I assume the first server debug log doesn't say anything unusual...
- Mark as New
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎Dec 02, 2008
08:53 AM
Yes, we have 2 different clients on different PC's in this case.
The server debug log doesn't say anything special (DENIED:...Licensed number of users already reached).
In this case we definitely have 2 different job handles, so it's not the same as the scenario when a successful checkout request from a server binds the job handle to that server.
Somehow it seems that if there is a license present (free or not) the checkout (job handle) binds to that server whatever client it comes from.
This behavior invalidates the redundancy functionality...
The server debug log doesn't say anything special (DENIED:...Licensed number of users already reached).
In this case we definitely have 2 different job handles, so it's not the same as the scenario when a successful checkout request from a server binds the job handle to that server.
Somehow it seems that if there is a license present (free or not) the checkout (job handle) binds to that server whatever client it comes from.
This behavior invalidates the redundancy functionality...
- Mark as New
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎Dec 02, 2008
12:42 PM
Hmm, a simple test seems to work at this end:
Is that similar to your setup?
- ServerA and ServerB each has a license file serving one license:
SERVER this_host ANY
VENDOR demo
INCREMENT one_each demo 1.0 1-jan-2010 1 SIGN="..." - ClientA and ClientB have search path set (using lmpath) to ServerA:ServerB
- ClientA uses lmflex to request copy of one_each, gets it from ServerA
- ClientB uses lmflex to request copy of one_each, ServerA rejects request with "DENIED: 'one_each' robert@ClientB", but ServerB accepts request with "OUT: 'one_each' robert@ClientB"
Is that similar to your setup?
- Mark as New
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎Dec 03, 2008
03:55 AM
Thanks Robert. Now it works.
We have a test checkout before the real checkout (to get correct return message on expired licenses), and the job handles where the same. Now we have different job handles.
We have a test checkout before the real checkout (to get correct return message on expired licenses), and the job handles where the same. Now we have different job handles.