Installing a Named SQL Instance

I am migrating a SQL Instance to an existing SQL 2000 cluster that already
has the default instance installed. There is a large user community that
will be accessing the databases in the 2nd instance and I am trying to find a
way to configure the installation so that they can continue to use the same
ODBC connections. Today, they are configured using a single name (such as
RAVEN). Is it possible to configure the 2nd instance using this single name?
Thanks in advance.
You should be able to create a DNS SRV record to point to the named
instance.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"Brian" <Brian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9FC76909-7CB6-48E2-A5E5-236F7665A150@.microsoft.com...
I am migrating a SQL Instance to an existing SQL 2000 cluster that already
has the default instance installed. There is a large user community that
will be accessing the databases in the 2nd instance and I am trying to find
a
way to configure the installation so that they can continue to use the same
ODBC connections. Today, they are configured using a single name (such as
RAVEN). Is it possible to configure the 2nd instance using this single
name?
Thanks in advance.
|||I remember doing this on a migration, and i had issues with some clients
trying to access using the new DNS record, it ws solved applying MDAC 2.8.
I hope you don't run in this error but try to check this is you experience
any problem.
"Tom Moreau" wrote:

> You should be able to create a DNS SRV record to point to the named
> instance.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "Brian" <Brian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9FC76909-7CB6-48E2-A5E5-236F7665A150@.microsoft.com...
> I am migrating a SQL Instance to an existing SQL 2000 cluster that already
> has the default instance installed. There is a large user community that
> will be accessing the databases in the 2nd instance and I am trying to find
> a
> way to configure the installation so that they can continue to use the same
> ODBC connections. Today, they are configured using a single name (such as
> RAVEN). Is it possible to configure the 2nd instance using this single
> name?
> Thanks in advance.
>
|||I assumed he was using current MDAC, but that's a good point.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"Frivas" <Frivas@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DFCE095-1AD3-42E5-B97B-D38570E13B8D@.microsoft.com...
I remember doing this on a migration, and i had issues with some clients
trying to access using the new DNS record, it ws solved applying MDAC 2.8.
I hope you don't run in this error but try to check this is you experience
any problem.
"Tom Moreau" wrote:

> You should be able to create a DNS SRV record to point to the named
> instance.
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
> SQL Server MVP
> Toronto, ON Canada
> https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
>
> "Brian" <Brian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9FC76909-7CB6-48E2-A5E5-236F7665A150@.microsoft.com...
> I am migrating a SQL Instance to an existing SQL 2000 cluster that already
> has the default instance installed. There is a large user community that
> will be accessing the databases in the 2nd instance and I am trying to
> find
> a
> way to configure the installation so that they can continue to use the
> same
> ODBC connections. Today, they are configured using a single name (such as
> RAVEN). Is it possible to configure the 2nd instance using this single
> name?
> Thanks in advance.
>
|||Named Instance support was introduced in MDAC 2.6. If you have to use an
earlier MDAC stack, you must alias the named instance using the client
network utility on each client.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Frivas" <Frivas@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3DFCE095-1AD3-42E5-B97B-D38570E13B8D@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I remember doing this on a migration, and i had issues with some clients
> trying to access using the new DNS record, it ws solved applying MDAC 2.8.
> I hope you don't run in this error but try to check this is you experience
> any problem.
> "Tom Moreau" wrote:

Installing a cluster on an existing instance of SQL 2000 SP3A

I have been "tapped" to install a passive node on an instance of SQL
that is not currently configured for clustering on a W2003. Can I
simply install clustering services on the current production instance,
then install a new instance on what would be the passive node? Then add
it via cluster admin?
Can I run cluster communications, heartbeat, etc on the public NICs..I
do not have two interfaces on each server.
Any information would be greatly appreciated as I have only done new
deployments and this being a prod server I do not want to try the trial
and error approach.
Thanks,
Hulicat
You can use the current active node as a cluster member. You can then
install a clustered instance of SQL and migrate the databases. The final
step is to turn off the original instance. Possible, Yes. Recommended, NO.
This entire project sounds like a low-availability solution. You are
reusing equipment instead of purchasing a certified cluster configuration.
The one-NIC cluster is possible but falls into the "worst practices"
category. Not having a test platform, even a virtual one, is asking for
even more trouble.
Clustering is a hardware and systems tool to help achieve increased system
availability. Shortcutting the hardware and the procedures will result in
lower availability rather than higher availability.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Hulicat" <dennis_A_white@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1162242129.910915.61910@.e3g2000cwe.googlegrou ps.com...
>I have been "tapped" to install a passive node on an instance of SQL
> that is not currently configured for clustering on a W2003. Can I
> simply install clustering services on the current production instance,
> then install a new instance on what would be the passive node? Then add
> it via cluster admin?
> Can I run cluster communications, heartbeat, etc on the public NICs..I
> do not have two interfaces on each server.
> Any information would be greatly appreciated as I have only done new
> deployments and this being a prod server I do not want to try the trial
> and error approach.
> Thanks,
> Hulicat
>
|||Thanks for that!
I am going tp lobby for new hardware or scratch the idea.
It's a small SPS portal.
Regards~~~
Geoff N. Hiten wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> You can use the current active node as a cluster member. You can then
> install a clustered instance of SQL and migrate the databases. The final
> step is to turn off the original instance. Possible, Yes. Recommended, NO.
> This entire project sounds like a low-availability solution. You are
> reusing equipment instead of purchasing a certified cluster configuration.
> The one-NIC cluster is possible but falls into the "worst practices"
> category. Not having a test platform, even a virtual one, is asking for
> even more trouble.
> Clustering is a hardware and systems tool to help achieve increased system
> availability. Shortcutting the hardware and the procedures will result in
> lower availability rather than higher availability.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Hulicat" <dennis_A_white@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1162242129.910915.61910@.e3g2000cwe.googlegrou ps.com...

Installing a 2nd instance of SQL server

I am installing a 2nd instance of SQL 2000 to our existing development
server.
Do I need to stop the existing/default instance that is running prior to the
install and will the 2nd install need the server to be re-booted?
thanks
Meenal
Hi,
No need to stop the second instance. But it is recommended to restart the
SQL Server machine after the installation of SQL Server and Service Pack 4.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Meenal Dhody" <meenal_dhody@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OhMI5WnrFHA.1172@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I am installing a 2nd instance of SQL 2000 to our existing development
> server.
> Do I need to stop the existing/default instance that is running prior to
> the
> install and will the 2nd install need the server to be re-booted?
> thanks
> Meenal
>

Installing a 2nd instance of SQL server

I am installing a 2nd instance of SQL 2000 to our existing development
server.
Do I need to stop the existing/default instance that is running prior to the
install and will the 2nd install need the server to be re-booted?
thanks
MeenalHi,
No need to stop the second instance. But it is recommended to restart the
SQL Server machine after the installation of SQL Server and Service Pack 4.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Meenal Dhody" <meenal_dhody@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OhMI5WnrFHA.1172@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I am installing a 2nd instance of SQL 2000 to our existing development
> server.
> Do I need to stop the existing/default instance that is running prior to
> the
> install and will the 2nd install need the server to be re-booted?
> thanks
> Meenal
>

Installing a 2nd instance of SQL server

I am installing a 2nd instance of SQL 2000 to our existing development
server.
Do I need to stop the existing/default instance that is running prior to the
install and will the 2nd install need the server to be re-booted?
thanks
MeenalHi,
No need to stop the second instance. But it is recommended to restart the
SQL Server machine after the installation of SQL Server and Service Pack 4.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Meenal Dhody" <meenal_dhody@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OhMI5WnrFHA.1172@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I am installing a 2nd instance of SQL 2000 to our existing development
> server.
> Do I need to stop the existing/default instance that is running prior to
> the
> install and will the 2nd install need the server to be re-booted?
> thanks
> Meenal
>sql

installing 2005 over 2000

I tried to install 2005 and chose the option to upgrade my existing default
instance. Then it errored out saying, I think, that I need to apply
service packs to my existing 2000 instance.
Why would I need to upgrade something I'm installing over?
Would I be better off just to uninstall 2000, install 2005 and attach all of
my .mdf databases?
Thanks,
TTina,
SQL 2005 will upgrade an existing SQL 2000 instance, but your SQL 2000
instance must be at SP3 or higher. Based on this and your earlier question,
I suggest loading the client tools only for SQL 2005 and doing some reading.
For example, you should really run the upgrade advisor against your existing
database servers to see if there may be any compatibility issues.
The good thing about an upgrade is it keeps all your logins and other
objects in place.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tina" <tinamseaburn@.nospammeexcite.com> wrote in message
news:eiTHreqhGHA.4864@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I tried to install 2005 and chose the option to upgrade my existing default
>instance. Then it errored out saying, I think, that I need to apply
>service packs to my existing 2000 instance.
> Why would I need to upgrade something I'm installing over?
> Would I be better off just to uninstall 2000, install 2005 and attach all
> of my .mdf databases?
> Thanks,
> T
>|||I ran the upgrade advisor and it didn't flag any thing about not having the
latest service packs so I thought I was ok. It was only the real install
that flagged that. I guess the advisor doesn't adivse on everything.
T
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23vWfOxqhGHA.3496@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Tina,
> SQL 2005 will upgrade an existing SQL 2000 instance, but your SQL 2000
> instance must be at SP3 or higher. Based on this and your earlier
> question, I suggest loading the client tools only for SQL 2005 and doing
> some reading. For example, you should really run the upgrade advisor
> against your existing database servers to see if there may be any
> compatibility issues.
> The good thing about an upgrade is it keeps all your logins and other
> objects in place.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Tina" <tinamseaburn@.nospammeexcite.com> wrote in message
> news:eiTHreqhGHA.4864@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>I tried to install 2005 and chose the option to upgrade my existing
>>default instance. Then it errored out saying, I think, that I need to
>>apply service packs to my existing 2000 instance.
>> Why would I need to upgrade something I'm installing over?
>> Would I be better off just to uninstall 2000, install 2005 and attach all
>> of my .mdf databases?
>> Thanks,
>> T
>|||The advisor looks at internal objects in each database. I suppose it should
warn about the server level as well.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tina" <tinamseaburn@.nospammeexcite.com> wrote in message
news:%23ymip2yhGHA.1000@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I ran the upgrade advisor and it didn't flag any thing about not having the
>latest service packs so I thought I was ok. It was only the real install
>that flagged that. I guess the advisor doesn't adivse on everything.
> T
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23vWfOxqhGHA.3496@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Tina,
>> SQL 2005 will upgrade an existing SQL 2000 instance, but your SQL 2000
>> instance must be at SP3 or higher. Based on this and your earlier
>> question, I suggest loading the client tools only for SQL 2005 and doing
>> some reading. For example, you should really run the upgrade advisor
>> against your existing database servers to see if there may be any
>> compatibility issues.
>> The good thing about an upgrade is it keeps all your logins and other
>> objects in place.
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Senior Database Administrator
>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>>
>> "Tina" <tinamseaburn@.nospammeexcite.com> wrote in message
>> news:eiTHreqhGHA.4864@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>I tried to install 2005 and chose the option to upgrade my existing
>>default instance. Then it errored out saying, I think, that I need to
>>apply service packs to my existing 2000 instance.
>> Why would I need to upgrade something I'm installing over?
>> Would I be better off just to uninstall 2000, install 2005 and attach
>> all of my .mdf databases?
>> Thanks,
>> T
>>
>

installing 2005 over 2000

I tried to install 2005 and chose the option to upgrade my existing default
instance. Then it errored out saying, I think, that I need to apply
service packs to my existing 2000 instance.
Why would I need to upgrade something I'm installing over?
Would I be better off just to uninstall 2000, install 2005 and attach all of
my .mdf databases?
Thanks,
TTina,
SQL 2005 will upgrade an existing SQL 2000 instance, but your SQL 2000
instance must be at SP3 or higher. Based on this and your earlier question,
I suggest loading the client tools only for SQL 2005 and doing some reading.
For example, you should really run the upgrade advisor against your existing
database servers to see if there may be any compatibility issues.
The good thing about an upgrade is it keeps all your logins and other
objects in place.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tina" <tinamseaburn@.nospammeexcite.com> wrote in message
news:eiTHreqhGHA.4864@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I tried to install 2005 and chose the option to upgrade my existing default
>instance. Then it errored out saying, I think, that I need to apply
>service packs to my existing 2000 instance.
> Why would I need to upgrade something I'm installing over?
> Would I be better off just to uninstall 2000, install 2005 and attach all
> of my .mdf databases?
> Thanks,
> T
>|||I ran the upgrade advisor and it didn't flag any thing about not having the
latest service packs so I thought I was ok. It was only the real install
that flagged that. I guess the advisor doesn't adivse on everything.
T
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23vWfOxqhGHA.3496@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Tina,
> SQL 2005 will upgrade an existing SQL 2000 instance, but your SQL 2000
> instance must be at SP3 or higher. Based on this and your earlier
> question, I suggest loading the client tools only for SQL 2005 and doing
> some reading. For example, you should really run the upgrade advisor
> against your existing database servers to see if there may be any
> compatibility issues.
> The good thing about an upgrade is it keeps all your logins and other
> objects in place.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Tina" <tinamseaburn@.nospammeexcite.com> wrote in message
> news:eiTHreqhGHA.4864@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>|||The advisor looks at internal objects in each database. I suppose it should
warn about the server level as well.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Tina" <tinamseaburn@.nospammeexcite.com> wrote in message
news:%23ymip2yhGHA.1000@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I ran the upgrade advisor and it didn't flag any thing about not having the
>latest service packs so I thought I was ok. It was only the real install
>that flagged that. I guess the advisor doesn't adivse on everything.
> T
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23vWfOxqhGHA.3496@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>

Installation of Table Question

Hi,
I am developing an add on to a db application where I need to install a
couple of tables to an existing db. I am curious what others use for
installation. Do most developers use SQL scripts excuted by ossql command
in a batch file?
ThanksI find that to be the most effective way to deliver the package. However,
it's really coming down to personal preference. You can also deliver the
package by making an ado connection to the database and run your ddl against
the database.
-oj
"George" <george@.ny.com> wrote in message
news:OALHWKfoFHA.2916@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am developing an add on to a db application where I need to install a
> couple of tables to an existing db. I am curious what others use for
> installation. Do most developers use SQL scripts excuted by ossql command
> in a batch file?
> Thanks
>|||That is the way I would do it. I find it reassuring as a dba to be able to
view queries that will be executed against the database. At least one
application I support does it like oj suggested and it makes me feel kind of
uneasy to run the rather frequent upgrade programs. I would probably like
to see the setup program launch the change script, if possible. I would use
OSQL to do it because it natively supports GO batch separators and it makes
writing code like this more natural, and OSQL gives you everything you need.
I guess the most important thing to ask is who will be using this upgrade?
Just your corporate user or is this a commercial application.
----
Louis Davidson - http://spaces.msn.com/members/drsql/
SQL Server MVP
"George" <george@.ny.com> wrote in message
news:OALHWKfoFHA.2916@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I am developing an add on to a db application where I need to install a
> couple of tables to an existing db. I am curious what others use for
> installation. Do most developers use SQL scripts excuted by ossql command
> in a batch file?
> Thanks
>

Installation Error: Error performing inpage operation

Hi All,
I un-installed existing SQL Server 2000 on my PC (Windows XP Pro), and when
I try to reinstall I am getting the following error
Setup Initialization Error - Error performing inpage operation
I tried to remove all instances of SQL Server from my PC, and still the
installation did not work.
Could anybody help me identifying the cause.
Awaiting your expertise.
Thanks
Hi
Try copying the CD to your local drive and running setup from there. This
error is usually caused when a read error occurs on transferring data
between a drive and RAM.
If it occurs during the file copy, you have either a bad CD or a CD faulty
drive.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Reilly" <Reilly@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1840BBF3-EBAF-4F3E-8B00-8CFF47B87BDB@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> I un-installed existing SQL Server 2000 on my PC (Windows XP Pro), and
when
> I try to reinstall I am getting the following error
> Setup Initialization Error - Error performing inpage operation
> I tried to remove all instances of SQL Server from my PC, and still the
> installation did not work.
> Could anybody help me identifying the cause.
> Awaiting your expertise.
> Thanks
>

Installation Error: Error performing inpage operation

Hi All,
I un-installed existing SQL Server 2000 on my PC (Windows XP Pro), and when
I try to reinstall I am getting the following error
Setup Initialization Error - Error performing inpage operation
I tried to remove all instances of SQL Server from my PC, and still the
installation did not work.
Could anybody help me identifying the cause.
Awaiting your expertise.
ThanksHi
Try copying the CD to your local drive and running setup from there. This
error is usually caused when a read error occurs on transferring data
between a drive and RAM.
If it occurs during the file copy, you have either a bad CD or a CD faulty
drive.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Reilly" <Reilly@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1840BBF3-EBAF-4F3E-8B00-8CFF47B87BDB@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> I un-installed existing SQL Server 2000 on my PC (Windows XP Pro), and
when
> I try to reinstall I am getting the following error
> Setup Initialization Error - Error performing inpage operation
> I tried to remove all instances of SQL Server from my PC, and still the
> installation did not work.
> Could anybody help me identifying the cause.
> Awaiting your expertise.
> Thanks
>