Directions on how to install SQL 2000 not as Windows admin

Can someone point me to the KB article, guide, or white paper on how to inst
all SQL Server 2000 using a Windows account that is not system administrator
for the the server?"Hal" <Hal@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EE70A9F1-FC92-4381-8428-8D01475E4B7C@.microsoft.com...
> Can someone point me to the KB article, guide, or white paper on how to
install SQL Server 2000 using a Windows account that is not system
administrator for the the server?<
Hmmm, typically you need to have local administrative rights to perform
application installs. Perhaps you could negiotiate, or create (depending on
your position on this ;), a local account that has administrative rights,
use that for the install, then disable the account once SQL Server is
installed.
Steve|||I appreciate the response, but it wasn't helpful.
I am certain Microsoft has produced a guide to setting up a SQL Server 2000
with an account that is not SysAdmin. I want a link to that guide.
If there isn't a guide, then someone should surely write one.
"Steve Thompson" wrote:

> "Hal" <Hal@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:EE70A9F1-FC92-4381-8428-8D01475E4B7C@.microsoft.com...
> install SQL Server 2000 using a Windows account that is not system
> administrator for the the server?<
> Hmmm, typically you need to have local administrative rights to perform
> application installs. Perhaps you could negiotiate, or create (depending o
n
> your position on this ;), a local account that has administrative rights,
> use that for the install, then disable the account once SQL Server is
> installed.
> Steve
>
>|||Is your question how to install SQL Server from a Windows account that
does not have Windows administrator rights, or is your question how to
install SQL Server so that the Windows user who installed SQL Server
cannot connect to the new SQL Server as SQL Server system administrator,
or is you question something about post-installation SQL Server setup?
I don't think you can do either of the first two, simply because the
installation makes changes to both Windows and SQL Server that should
not be allowed by someone without administrator privileges.
In any case, it would help if you could be more specific about whether
"account" means Windows account, SQL Server account (login), or
something else, whether SysAdmin refers to the SQL Server system
administrator role or something else, and what you mean by "setting up".
Steve Kass
Drew University
Hal wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>I appreciate the response, but it wasn't helpful.
>I am certain Microsoft has produced a guide to setting up a SQL Server 2000
with an account that is not SysAdmin. I want a link to that guide.
>If there isn't a guide, then someone should surely write one.
>"Steve Thompson" wrote:
>
>|||I'm betting the question is "How do I install SQL 2K and configure it so the
Service Account is something besides the Local System or an Admin Account".
If that's the case, create an account you want the service to run with and
then specify that account
during the install. If you've already installed, then go into Enterprise Ma
nager and select the Security Tab. Type in the account info there and click
on OK. SQL with then apply the correct security permissions to that accoun
t. If you do it in the Ser
vices portion of computer manager, the security permissions won't be applied
and the service will not start.
"Steve Kass" wrote:

> Is your question how to install SQL Server from a Windows account that
> does not have Windows administrator rights, or is your question how to
> install SQL Server so that the Windows user who installed SQL Server
> cannot connect to the new SQL Server as SQL Server system administrator,
> or is you question something about post-installation SQL Server setup?
> I don't think you can do either of the first two, simply because the
> installation makes changes to both Windows and SQL Server that should
> not be allowed by someone without administrator privileges.
> In any case, it would help if you could be more specific about whether
> "account" means Windows account, SQL Server account (login), or
> something else, whether SysAdmin refers to the SQL Server system
> administrator role or something else, and what you mean by "setting up".
> Steve Kass
> Drew University
> Hal wrote:
>
>sql

Direct print in RS 2000 no longer works in RS 2005 --what's the secret?

Hi all,
I have a Windows Forms application in VS 2005 that displays reports inside a
System.Windows.Forms.WebBrowser. The user can print using the print icon
within the browser window, but I also have a big Print button on the form
that prints directly. Now, with RS 2000, my print button worked fine, I
directed the ActiveX control to directly print like this:
rsBrowser.Navigate(ReportServicesPath & SpecifiedReportURL &
"&rs%3aCommand=Get&rc%3aGetImage=8.00.1038.00RSClientPrint.html")
But, I've now upgraded to SQL 2005 and RS 2005, and this code doesn't work,
although printing via the print icon still works fine. What is the
equivalent of the above code for RS 2005'
The above code puts an error into the browser window:
>>
Reporting Services Error
----
a.. An internal error occurred on the report server. See the error log for
more details. (rsInternalError) Get Online Help
a.. Specified argument was out of the range of valid values. Parameter
name: offset
<<
I looked at the error log, but it is impenetrable to me.
Thanks,
C17Hello C17,
I understand that you want to use the URL access to print the report.
In Reporting Services 2005, the RC parameter prefix is changed and you
could not use the GetImage now.
I would like to suggest you use the ReportViewer control.
Here is the article for your reference:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/microsoft.reporting.winforms.report
viewer(VS.80).aspx
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
==================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.|||Thank you. The ReportViewer control looks like a better way to display
reports anyway. I will switch over to it.
--C17|||Hello C17,
If you have any question, pleae feel free to let me know.
Sincerely,
Wei Lu
Microsoft Online Community Support
==================================================
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
==================================================This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Diplaying Values from fields on the Same Textbox

Hi,
Is it possible to display values from different fields in the same textbox.I
have a field that returns system generated IDs and a field that returns ID
values that have been manually input by the user.
I want values from these fields to display on the same textbox as they act
Product Id for Products that shown on the invoice report.
Does anyone know how I can achieve this?
Regards,
--
Noels
"The Best thing in life is life"You can do this either with the textbox or the query. Let's say you have a
field called sys_id and manual_id.
With a query:
select convert(varchar(15), sys_id) + ' ' + manual_id as product_id from
sometable where ...
That would be my preferred way of handling this.
The other way is to set the textbox to an expression and in the expression
concatenate the two fields.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Noels" <noels@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7528B73A-5EF9-4449-A85E-2F816282A148@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> Is it possible to display values from different fields in the same
> textbox.I
> have a field that returns system generated IDs and a field that returns ID
> values that have been manually input by the user.
> I want values from these fields to display on the same textbox as they act
> Product Id for Products that shown on the invoice report.
> Does anyone know how I can achieve this?
> Regards,
> --
> Noels
> "The Best thing in life is life"|||Thank you so much,why didnt I think of that!
Noels
"The Best thing in life is life"
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> You can do this either with the textbox or the query. Let's say you have a
> field called sys_id and manual_id.
> With a query:
> select convert(varchar(15), sys_id) + ' ' + manual_id as product_id from
> sometable where ...
> That would be my preferred way of handling this.
> The other way is to set the textbox to an expression and in the expression
> concatenate the two fields.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "Noels" <noels@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:7528B73A-5EF9-4449-A85E-2F816282A148@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is it possible to display values from different fields in the same
> > textbox.I
> > have a field that returns system generated IDs and a field that returns ID
> > values that have been manually input by the user.
> >
> > I want values from these fields to display on the same textbox as they act
> > Product Id for Products that shown on the invoice report.
> >
> > Does anyone know how I can achieve this?
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Noels
> > "The Best thing in life is life"
>
>

Dimensional Model

I am in the process of designing a Booking, Billing and Backlog
datamart. My backend is going to be SQL Server 2K. Data source is
Baan ERP system. The transaction level I have to populate the
datamart is at sales order line level.
My problem is that the data model I have come up with is more
relational than dimensional. Here is what I have got so far.
Orders
Order Detail
Customer
Products
Countries
Regions
Employees
Other way of sourcing the data would be to write one big query from
ERP and then do the dimensional model but that would slow down the
data retrieval. I would be grateful if any you can share your
experience with this sort of a datamart.
Thanks
Ather
Well, you have to take the approach of dimensional modelling to make it
work. http://www.ralphkimball.com has some good articles to get you started,
also I would recommend a book "Data Wareshousing TookKit" by the same author
has some good examples that you can related to.
Pramod
"Ather Mian" <athermian@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6ed9e09e.0403310515.4c0e0a79@.posting.google.c om...
> I am in the process of designing a Booking, Billing and Backlog
> datamart. My backend is going to be SQL Server 2K. Data source is
> Baan ERP system. The transaction level I have to populate the
> datamart is at sales order line level.
> My problem is that the data model I have come up with is more
> relational than dimensional. Here is what I have got so far.
> Orders
> Order Detail
> Customer
> Products
> Countries
> Regions
> Employees
> Other way of sourcing the data would be to write one big query from
> ERP and then do the dimensional model but that would slow down the
> data retrieval. I would be grateful if any you can share your
> experience with this sort of a datamart.
> Thanks
> Ather
sql

Dimensional Model

I am in the process of designing a Booking, Billing and Backlog
datamart. My backend is going to be SQL Server 2K. Data source is
Baan ERP system. The transaction level I have to populate the
datamart is at sales order line level.
My problem is that the data model I have come up with is more
relational than dimensional. Here is what I have got so far.
Orders
Order Detail
Customer
Products
Countries
Regions
Employees
Other way of sourcing the data would be to write one big query from
ERP and then do the dimensional model but that would slow down the
data retrieval. I would be grateful if any you can share your
experience with this sort of a datamart.
Thanks
AtherWell, you have to take the approach of dimensional modelling to make it
work. http://www.ralphkimball.com has some good articles to get you started,
also I would recommend a book "Data Wareshousing TookKit" by the same author
has some good examples that you can related to.
Pramod
"Ather Mian" <athermian@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6ed9e09e.0403310515.4c0e0a79@.posting.google.com...
> I am in the process of designing a Booking, Billing and Backlog
> datamart. My backend is going to be SQL Server 2K. Data source is
> Baan ERP system. The transaction level I have to populate the
> datamart is at sales order line level.
> My problem is that the data model I have come up with is more
> relational than dimensional. Here is what I have got so far.
> Orders
> Order Detail
> Customer
> Products
> Countries
> Regions
> Employees
> Other way of sourcing the data would be to write one big query from
> ERP and then do the dimensional model but that would slow down the
> data retrieval. I would be grateful if any you can share your
> experience with this sort of a datamart.
> Thanks
> Ather

Dimension values without data in a fact table

I have an ODS system and a Data warehouse system
I have a Sales fact table in the ODS system and I have these fields:
SALES
ID_CUSTOMER (PK),
ID_MODEL (PK),
ID_TIME (PK),
SALES,
QUANT_ART,
COST
Then in some records in the fields ID_Time or ID_Model or ID_Customer I
don’t have values (NULL) because in the transactional systems these record
don’t have values (NULL).
The users want to generate aggregate reports with the Sales table...
The question is:
I have to put a “dummy” value in the dimensions Customer, Model and Time
(for example “0”) and put this value in the fact table if the dimensions
fields have NULL values?
Or I have to leave the NULL values?
What is the best choice? Why?
Personally -- and this really does boil down to personal preference -- I
believe that one of the key things that should happen during an ETL is
elimination of all "questionable" data. That includes unknown data -- can
you really report on something that's unknown? At the least, generate
well-known tokens to replace the NULLs with. If possible, get rid of those
rows on the way in (of course, that really depends on context) -- perhaps
they can appear in the aggregate data, but not in the line-level data?
There are various ways of dealing with the problem, but personally I am very
firm when designing data warehouses and ensure that, one way or another,
there will be absolutely no NULLs in the database.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.sqljunkies.com/weblog/amachanic
"CLAUDIO" <CLAUDIO@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:937E414E-AB9A-4E4D-8A58-D8251139550E@.microsoft.com...
> I have an ODS system and a Data warehouse system
> I have a Sales fact table in the ODS system and I have these fields:
> SALES
> ID_CUSTOMER (PK),
> ID_MODEL (PK),
> ID_TIME (PK),
> SALES,
> QUANT_ART,
> COST
>
> Then in some records in the fields ID_Time or ID_Model or ID_Customer I
> don't have values (NULL) because in the transactional systems these record
> don't have values (NULL).
> The users want to generate aggregate reports with the Sales table...
> The question is:
> I have to put a "dummy" value in the dimensions Customer, Model and Time
> (for example "0") and put this value in the fact table if the dimensions
> fields have NULL values?
> Or I have to leave the NULL values?
> What is the best choice? Why?
>
sql

Dimension values without data in a fact table

I have an ODS system and a Data warehouse system
I have a Sales fact table in the ODS system and I have these fields:
SALES
ID_CUSTOMER (PK),
ID_MODEL (PK),
ID_TIME (PK),
SALES,
QUANT_ART,
COST
Then in some records in the fields ID_Time or ID_Model or ID_Customer I
don’t have values (NULL) because in the transactional systems these record
don’t have values (NULL).
The users want to generate aggregate reports with the Sales table...
The question is:
I have to put a “dummy” value in the dimensions Customer, Model and Time
(for example “0”) and put this value in the fact table if the dimensions
fields have NULL values'
Or I have to leave the NULL values?
What is the best choice? Why?Personally -- and this really does boil down to personal preference -- I
believe that one of the key things that should happen during an ETL is
elimination of all "questionable" data. That includes unknown data -- can
you really report on something that's unknown? At the least, generate
well-known tokens to replace the NULLs with. If possible, get rid of those
rows on the way in (of course, that really depends on context) -- perhaps
they can appear in the aggregate data, but not in the line-level data?
There are various ways of dealing with the problem, but personally I am very
firm when designing data warehouses and ensure that, one way or another,
there will be absolutely no NULLs in the database.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.sqljunkies.com/weblog/amachanic
--
"CLAUDIO" <CLAUDIO@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:937E414E-AB9A-4E4D-8A58-D8251139550E@.microsoft.com...
> I have an ODS system and a Data warehouse system
> I have a Sales fact table in the ODS system and I have these fields:
> SALES
> ID_CUSTOMER (PK),
> ID_MODEL (PK),
> ID_TIME (PK),
> SALES,
> QUANT_ART,
> COST
>
> Then in some records in the fields ID_Time or ID_Model or ID_Customer I
> don't have values (NULL) because in the transactional systems these record
> don't have values (NULL).
> The users want to generate aggregate reports with the Sales table...
> The question is:
> I have to put a "dummy" value in the dimensions Customer, Model and Time
> (for example "0") and put this value in the fact table if the dimensions
> fields have NULL values'
> Or I have to leave the NULL values?
> What is the best choice? Why?
>

Dimension Security

Hi,

I have Created Dimension Security by restricting the user to see only his information whoever login to the system by creating a new role. It is working fine by checking the cubes by changing the role through change user option but when the cube was integrate it to any Analysis services reporting tool(Excel, Proclarity) inspite of the roles mentioned it displays the records of all the user.

Can anyone please help me out in this situation?

guessing wildy...

if it can identify the user, they get a restricted view

if it cannot identify the user, they see everything

maybe you need to switch off some kind of anonymous access

maybe it cannot identify the user when they are coming in via one of these tools? is it possible to display the username somewhere so you can at least dis/prove this?

|||

Hi adolf,

Thanks for the reply.....

Hence we are getting the analysis services cubes to any of this tools by accessing the server directly and any of the processing in cube can be done only in server and the tool is used to only show the data. so i hope there is nothing to do with the reporting tool regarding security. something to be done with in the cube

Differential Backup Size and Transaction Log Backup Size !

Hello All,
Sometime back we had scheduled Differential database backups on our OLTP
system. The backup is scheduled to run once at 6AM, once at 12Noon and
7PM. This backup is apart from the half hourly transaction log backup
and the daily full database backup.
Normally, for a day, the Transaction log backup does not exceed 300MB and
the 6AM Diff backup does not exceed 400MB, the 12Noon Diff backup does not
exceed 500MB and the 7PM Diff backup does not exceed 600MB.
However, sometimes, I notice that the 6AM Diff backup is around 1100MB,
the 12Noon Diff backup around 1300MB and the 7PM Diff backup around 1400MB
but the Transaction log backup still 300MB.
I would expect the Transaction Log backup also to show around 1500MB.
Does anyone know why the differential database backup is so large when
compared to the Transaction Log.
Thanks,
RgnOne explanation would be that you move to bulk logged recovery mode, and
bcp'd in a lot of data ( which is minimally logged).
Another explanation would be that you dropped/re-created a bunch of indexes,
only the drop/create statement would be in the log, but the entire index
would be copied in the differential backup.
--
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
"rgn" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9B20C782-042B-4D0C-857C-F68787C5C45C@.microsoft.com...
> Hello All,
> Sometime back we had scheduled Differential database backups on our OLTP
> system. The backup is scheduled to run once at 6AM, once at 12Noon and
> 7PM. This backup is apart from the half hourly transaction log backup
> and the daily full database backup.
> Normally, for a day, the Transaction log backup does not exceed 300MB and
> the 6AM Diff backup does not exceed 400MB, the 12Noon Diff backup does not
> exceed 500MB and the 7PM Diff backup does not exceed 600MB.
> However, sometimes, I notice that the 6AM Diff backup is around 1100MB,
> the 12Noon Diff backup around 1300MB and the 7PM Diff backup around 1400MB
> but the Transaction log backup still 300MB.
> I would expect the Transaction Log backup also to show around 1500MB.
> Does anyone know why the differential database backup is so large when
> compared to the Transaction Log.
> Thanks,
> Rgn|||Wayne
You are very true in saying that the bulk-logged operation generates a large transaction log backup and/or differential DB backup. However, my question is that, if the differential Db backup is 1.5GB then even the transaction log backup shoul
be of simillar size, right
In my case, the transaction log seems to be only 300MB where as the differential db backup is 1.4GB
rgn

differential backup shrinks?

I am running a differential backup on a SQL 2000 system. As expected after performing a backup, the subsequent differential b/ups are small and generally grow from there. However, during some parts of the day, the differential file will grow dramatically and then get smaller. HUH? Based on all that I have read and know about diff b/ups, I don't see how the differential b/up can shrink without doing a full backup.
Any ideas what would cause this to occur?
TIA,
RonI am running a differential backup on a SQL 2000 system. As expected after performing a backup, the subsequent differential b/ups are small and generally grow from there. However, during some parts of the day, the differential file will grow dramatically and then get smaller. HUH? Based on all that I have read and know about diff b/ups, I don't see how the differential b/up can shrink without doing a full backup.
Any ideas what would cause this to occur?
TIA,
Ron

Q1 I don't see how the differential b/up can shrink without doing a full backup. Any ideas what would cause this to occur?
A1 There are scenarios in which this may occur; the most common involves special purpose [transient] index manipulations, others sometimes involve large daily updates.

Index Manipulation Example:
Adding a new [temporary] index for a short term ad hoc purpose or making relativly few transient index changes on a large index can make for a lot of changes relative to the last full dump. Subsequently dropping an added index and / or undoing changes to an existing index that has been manipulated may then easily make the size of a later Diff dump smaller than the size of a previous Diff dump. Essentially, the [later] state of the DB in such cases is much closer to the original state of the DB (before transient index manipulations occurred).

Large Daily Update Example:
Consider active / inactive status column changes that are mostly inactive before the business day, active durring it, and inactive following the business day, and on weekends).|||Great point. Some other DBA's and I thought of that last night and will check for that on Monday.
Much Thanks,
Ron|||Originally posted by Ronner
Great point. Some other DBA's and I thought of that last night and will check for that on Monday.
Much Thanks,
Ron

You are welcome; just out of curiosity, was there a fairly clear cause?|||Haven't identified it yet.
Hasn't occurred since Thurs evening.
I will post when it recurrs.
There are some managment reports and functions on this system that might generate some new objects that are subsequently deleted.
At least that's the theory.
I'll let you know.
Ron

Different locking behavior..

This might not be an sqlserver issue but i dont know where to post it..

We got two sqlsevers dedicated for system testing, the only difference between the two is that server 1 is equipped with a Pentium III proc. Server 2 has an Xeon proc. Service packs, database versions are exactly the same.

All traffic goes through MTS = Serializeble.

From one quite long save operation the servers behave completely different. On te Xeon server the transaction takes less than one sec while on the pentium III server it takes up to 20 sec.

Ive used performance monitor to see whats happening and the "SQLServer:Memory:allocated locks" value is showing a completely differnet value.

On Xeon it goes up to 1050 locks, on pentium III it explodes up to 1 234 881 locks!!

My guess is that it can take up to 20secs to allocate all those locks!?

We have swithed MTS server and sqlservers but the behaivor remains for sqlserver 1..

Nothing strange in the eventlogs..

Should the execution plans differ between xeon and pentium III procs?

Im totally lost here..hope you can understand the problem :)Have a look at the query plans and see if they are different. Could be due to out of date or different statistics.

This is a lot easier to diagnose and optimise if all your access is via stored procs.

Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?

Hello,
We have a standalone Enterprise edition sql 2000 server that we want to
migrate to a cluster and make it a virtual sql server, for high availability
reasons.
We do not want to change the name of the SQL Server, as hundreds of
databases are on this server, and hundreds of applications refer to this SQL
Server name. Because of these requirements, we cannot use the steps in BOL
to upgrade our standalone to a cluster (that includes changing the sql server
name)
We are moving to two new servers (the current server will be retired)
Does anyone know the following two questions...
Is it possible to take the system databases from a standalone version of SQL
Server, and restore them to a clustered SQL Server?
Are there differences in the system databases on a stand alone SQL Server
vs. a clustered virtual SQL Server?
Here is a high level idea of what we would like to do:
- Stop SQL on the standalone server
- Rename the standalone server
- Install sql on the cluster, and give the virtual sql server the orignal
name of my standalone server
- shutdown sql on the cluster
- copy the data and log files for all system and user databases to the
cluster from the standalone server
- start up sql on the cluster
Thanks for your help and time!
I wouldn't try and copy the system databases from one server to another,
much less from a non-clustered instance to a clustered instance. You are
likely much better off aliasing the old name to the new name using a DNS
record or a client-side alias. Even if you do manage to copy the system
databases, the network name presented to the outside world by the Cluster
won't change so you will not solve your initial problem.
Geoff N.Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"KellyVV" <KellyVV@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6BC09EC5-ACC9-4493-8E89-43684AC9A82E@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We have a standalone Enterprise edition sql 2000 server that we want to
> migrate to a cluster and make it a virtual sql server, for high
> availability
> reasons.
> We do not want to change the name of the SQL Server, as hundreds of
> databases are on this server, and hundreds of applications refer to this
> SQL
> Server name. Because of these requirements, we cannot use the steps in
> BOL
> to upgrade our standalone to a cluster (that includes changing the sql
> server
> name)
> We are moving to two new servers (the current server will be retired)
> Does anyone know the following two questions...
> Is it possible to take the system databases from a standalone version of
> SQL
> Server, and restore them to a clustered SQL Server?
> Are there differences in the system databases on a stand alone SQL Server
> vs. a clustered virtual SQL Server?
> Here is a high level idea of what we would like to do:
> - Stop SQL on the standalone server
> - Rename the standalone server
> - Install sql on the cluster, and give the virtual sql server the orignal
> name of my standalone server
> - shutdown sql on the cluster
> - copy the data and log files for all system and user databases to the
> cluster from the standalone server
> - start up sql on the cluster
> Thanks for your help and time!
|||The ability to move the system and user databases between a standalone
Enterprise instance and clustered Enterprise server instance as you are
proposing is perfectly possible.
I have not noticed any difference between clustered and non-clustered system
databases, I however have not conducted any comprehensive comparison.
The issues you will more likely encounter here are the same issues as
migrating system databases between standalone instances of SQL.
Have a look at 224071. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/224071.
You may want to evaluate the possibility of migrating your user databases
and specific system information (Logins etc) as an alternative to ensure
your new setup clean.
Your assumptions about the SQL instance names are correct, if I understand
you correctly, are correct: You have a default standalone instance on
ServerX (which will be removed from the network) which you wish to replace
with a ServerX virtual server default instance. The only consideration here
would be that there can not be another preexisting default instance of SQL
installed on the cluster.
Regards
Gary Hope
iSolve Business Solutions
South Africa
"KellyVV" <KellyVV@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6BC09EC5-ACC9-4493-8E89-43684AC9A82E@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> We have a standalone Enterprise edition sql 2000 server that we want to
> migrate to a cluster and make it a virtual sql server, for high
> availability
> reasons.
> We do not want to change the name of the SQL Server, as hundreds of
> databases are on this server, and hundreds of applications refer to this
> SQL
> Server name. Because of these requirements, we cannot use the steps in
> BOL
> to upgrade our standalone to a cluster (that includes changing the sql
> server
> name)
> We are moving to two new servers (the current server will be retired)
> Does anyone know the following two questions...
> Is it possible to take the system databases from a standalone version of
> SQL
> Server, and restore them to a clustered SQL Server?
> Are there differences in the system databases on a stand alone SQL Server
> vs. a clustered virtual SQL Server?
> Here is a high level idea of what we would like to do:
> - Stop SQL on the standalone server
> - Rename the standalone server
> - Install sql on the cluster, and give the virtual sql server the orignal
> name of my standalone server
> - shutdown sql on the cluster
> - copy the data and log files for all system and user databases to the
> cluster from the standalone server
> - start up sql on the cluster
> Thanks for your help and time!

Differences between SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2000 or W2K3

Hi,
I know that the SQL Server 2005 Enterprise System Requirements said that
it's possible to install SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2000 Server.
But I'd like to know if there's known issues of features not working well on
W2K Server ?
Thanks for your help.
Regards
jeffHi Jeff
I have not tried this, as W2K3 has significantly improved I/O it would be
worthwhile upgrading.
John
"Jeff" wrote:

> Hi,
> I know that the SQL Server 2005 Enterprise System Requirements said that
> it's possible to install SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2000 Server.
> But I'd like to know if there's known issues of features not working well
on
> W2K Server ?
> Thanks for your help.
> Regards
> jeff

Differences between SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2000 or W2K3

Hi,
I know that the SQL Server 2005 Enterprise System Requirements said that
it's possible to install SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2000 Server.
But I'd like to know if there's known issues of features not working well on
W2K Server ?
Thanks for your help.
Regards
jeffHi Jeff
I have not tried this, as W2K3 has significantly improved I/O it would be
worthwhile upgrading.
John
"Jeff" wrote:
> Hi,
> I know that the SQL Server 2005 Enterprise System Requirements said that
> it's possible to install SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2000 Server.
> But I'd like to know if there's known issues of features not working well on
> W2K Server ?
> Thanks for your help.
> Regards
> jeff