|
|
Posted by David on 11/20/06 15:46
Rick Brandt wrote:
> David wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I just asked some people to help me out and phone microsoft with the
> > following information, kindly they refused unless we setup a support
> > contract with them first, for pre-sales information. (That really does
> > not sound like good business sense to me - anyway here is our problem,
> > if anyone could help thanks).
> >
> > "To tell and ask microsoft:
> >
> > We will be setting up a microsoft sql server 2000 instance running on
> > a windows 2003 server.
> >
> > 1) We need to check this can run alongside a microsoft 2003 sql server
> > (either workgroup or standard edition), on the same machine. Are there
> > any .dll clashes if we do this? If there are can we run SQL Server
> > 2000, in a virtual machine running windows 2000 professional. (I have
> > a licenced copy we can use for this).
> >
> > 2) If we run one instance of 2000, and one of 2003 of the sql servers,
> > can one use the processor licence model, and one use the CAL licence
> > model."
> >
> > Thanks for any help, and any idea why they actually force you to use
> > news groups for pre-sales information?
> >
> > David
>
> I can't answer the license question, but we ran both SS2K and SS2K5 on a single
> server for several months. We just had to use a non-default named instance for
> the second instance installed. That means you cannot refer to the non-default
> instance by IP address.
>
> Other than being a bitch to later remove the 2K instance and switch the 2K5
> instance to the default instance name we had no issues.
>
> --
> Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
> Email (as appropriate) to...
> RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Thats just what we wanted to hear thanks (apart from being a bitch to
uninstall - no suprises there).
Could someone please confirm that if both instances are run on
different ports we could do IPAddress:<Unique Port> for both instances.
One instance would be firewalled between another network, so its
important we can do only TCP/IP with an instance, without allowing
named pipes, etc through.
Thanks
David
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|