Installation Of SSRS

I have two machines on a network (Machine A and Machine B). Machine A has SQL
Server and IIS installed on it and Machine B is the web server. Machine B
does not have Sql Server.
Is there any way by which I can upload my .rdl files on Machine B ie; create
the virtual folders (Reports and ReportsServer) on Machine B?
TIAafraid not as far as I know. When you deploy the reports the rdl files
are actually stored in the reporting services database, which is on
machine A. They aren't stored as physical files on your web server /
Machine B.
A further problem - if you're using RS 200 - is that the web server
will have to have an instance of SQL server installed on it, as the
reporting services database has to be on the same machine as the web
project. Sounds crazy I know but that's the way it is.|||This is so wrong. You DO NOT have to have SQL Server installed where RS is
installed. A quick primer.
RS is an asp.net application. It uses SQL Server as its metadata/object
store. SQL Server can be either on the same machine or on another machine
(this is true for both RS 2000 and RS 2005). If you have Enterprise you can
support a web farm. Several RS servers all sharing the same database (this
means reports, subscriptions, security, etc is setup once for the whole web
farm deployment).
Licensing is a different matter. Any box that has RS installed needs a SQL
Server license, just the same as if you do have SQL Server on the box.
My preference is to have SQL Server on the same box even if my data is
somewhere else. It doesn't cost any more and then my metadata/object storage
is on the same machine as RS. However, again, you do not have to do this.
Note, if the intention is to integrate RS with your own web app you should
really really consider RS 2005. RS 2005 does not require a SQL Server 2005
database, it can use SQL Server 2000 database BUT you do have to buy a SQL
Server 2005 license for the box running RS. VS 2005 has two new controls
that work only with RS 2005: a web form and a winform control. The webform
control makes integration much easier and it is easier to get fuller
functionality quicker than anything you could do with RS 2000.
--
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Gearóid" <ghealy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1146818234.435496.208080@.i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> afraid not as far as I know. When you deploy the reports the rdl files
> are actually stored in the reporting services database, which is on
> machine A. They aren't stored as physical files on your web server /
> Machine B.
> A further problem - if you're using RS 200 - is that the web server
> will have to have an instance of SQL server installed on it, as the
> reporting services database has to be on the same machine as the web
> project. Sounds crazy I know but that's the way it is.
>|||I tried to change the name of the instance of SQL server while installing
SSRS, but it is givinng me error "Login Failed for Guest". I can login to the
Query Analyzer from this remote machine but SSRS is not allowing to connect.
What is the proper way of assiging user name and pwd while installing SSRS.
Do I have to make changes to logins and users on the sql machine.
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> This is so wrong. You DO NOT have to have SQL Server installed where RS is
> installed. A quick primer.
> RS is an asp.net application. It uses SQL Server as its metadata/object
> store. SQL Server can be either on the same machine or on another machine
> (this is true for both RS 2000 and RS 2005). If you have Enterprise you can
> support a web farm. Several RS servers all sharing the same database (this
> means reports, subscriptions, security, etc is setup once for the whole web
> farm deployment).
> Licensing is a different matter. Any box that has RS installed needs a SQL
> Server license, just the same as if you do have SQL Server on the box.
> My preference is to have SQL Server on the same box even if my data is
> somewhere else. It doesn't cost any more and then my metadata/object storage
> is on the same machine as RS. However, again, you do not have to do this.
> Note, if the intention is to integrate RS with your own web app you should
> really really consider RS 2005. RS 2005 does not require a SQL Server 2005
> database, it can use SQL Server 2000 database BUT you do have to buy a SQL
> Server 2005 license for the box running RS. VS 2005 has two new controls
> that work only with RS 2005: a web form and a winform control. The webform
> control makes integration much easier and it is easier to get fuller
> functionality quicker than anything you could do with RS 2000.
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>
> "Gearóid" <ghealy@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1146818234.435496.208080@.i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > afraid not as far as I know. When you deploy the reports the rdl files
> > are actually stored in the reporting services database, which is on
> > machine A. They aren't stored as physical files on your web server /
> > Machine B.
> >
> > A further problem - if you're using RS 200 - is that the web server
> > will have to have an instance of SQL server installed on it, as the
> > reporting services database has to be on the same machine as the web
> > project. Sounds crazy I know but that's the way it is.
> >
>
>