Can I install both Management Studio and Management Studio Express on same machine?

I want to install the following on my machine:

MSDE 2000 Release A

SQL Server 2000 SP4

SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition with SP1

SQL Server 2000 Express with SP1

Management Studio

Management Studio Express

The only one that I'm concerning is whether Management Studio and Management Studio Express can coexist in one machine.

Thanks for any help,

Peter

NO. Products have been mutually exclusive since early betas.sql

Can I have...

Hi

Is it possible to have both sql server 2005 and sql server express 2005 installed on the same machine?

thanks

Yes.

SQL Server Express will install with a 'default' instance name of [.\SQLExpress]

And if you allow the SQL (non-Express) to use the 'default' instance, it will be know by the computer name.

|||

As long as you do not specify the non-SQLExpress instance to be the named "SQLEXPRESS" instance, you can install as many additional SQL Server non-SQLExpress instances in addition to the SQL Server Express one as the machine can take.

Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

|||Thanks guys.sql

can i develop on a different machine?

I have just installed reporting services on our web server and am able
to create report projects from there, but I don't generally create
visual studio projects on the web server. I use a development machine
that does not have IIS installed. Is there any way to create report
projects on my development machine and point it to the report server?
I can't find any information on this, all of the examples I find tell
me to open a new report project, but the template only exists on the
report server. Is there some client tool I need to install?When you installed on the web server you installed both server and client
tools. Normally you would not have VS installed on the production machine
and only install the server part. Although it can be handy to be developing
on a machine that has both installed it is not necessary. When you preview a
report in VS it is not using IIS. Just install the client tools from the RS
installation on a machine that has Visual Studio on it.
--
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"malpous" <porterdn@.email.uc.edu> wrote in message
news:97b85c30.0411221031.6907a8e2@.posting.google.com...
> I have just installed reporting services on our web server and am able
> to create report projects from there, but I don't generally create
> visual studio projects on the web server. I use a development machine
> that does not have IIS installed. Is there any way to create report
> projects on my development machine and point it to the report server?
> I can't find any information on this, all of the examples I find tell
> me to open a new report project, but the template only exists on the
> report server. Is there some client tool I need to install?

Can I access sql 2000 from machine having sql2005

Dear All,

I am developing a network application in asp.net. The database is in local machine having sql 2005. But the user database is already existent. So I am accessing that database which is sql2000. does it give any problem while connecting from sql2005 machine to sql2000. If yes it is giving me error as follows:

An error has occurred while establishing a connection to the server. When connecting to SQL Server 2005, this failure may be caused by the fact that under the default settings SQL Server does not allow remote connections. (provider: TCP Provider, error: 0 - No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it.)

connection string is :

"Data Source=192.168.1.16,1433;Network Library=DBMSSOCN;Initial Catalog=mycatalog;User ID=myuserid;Password=mypwd;"

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks and Regards.

Fazal

This indicates that your TCP/IP was not enabled or your sql server was not listening on the appropriate port.

|||

Go to "Microsoft SQL Server 2005" in programm files => onfiguration Tools =>SQL Server Surface Area Configuration =>first option=>Remote Connections

and here allow remote connection = Use both TCP/IP and name pipes => OK

After that you must restart SQL Server 2005 in order to apply the modification and try againa

Popa IUlia

_____________________

MCP.MCAD.MCSD

Can I access MSDE on a remote machine with Enterprise Manager?

We just installed an application, WhatsUpGold, to monitor our servers. Management won't let me host that on my primary SQL box. So, we are using MSDE on the local machine (call that box my_netmon).

I can access the db with very basic functionality using osql while on the my_netmon machine. I've added my domain user account as a System Admin using the following commands.

exec sp_grantlogin @.name
go

exec sp_addsrvrolemember @.name, 'sysadmin'

But when I go to the my_sql machine and try to attach to it with Enterprise Manager I get an error that the server does not exist.

What gives? Is it just not possible, or am I missing something here?

My goal is to just be able to see the data stored in the MSDE db. Write views, etc...

Please advise,

MarcHas anybody accessed MSDE from a remote machine. Or can it only be access locally with ODBC type connections?|||yes, you can use MSDE remotely. what does your connection string look like? is it a named instance?

for that matter, why bother with MSDE? it's ancient. you should use SQL Server Express if this is for new development.

Can connect with IP number but not with machine name

Running MSDE2000A named instance on an XP Pro machine as part of a domain
(W2003 server) , connecting from a client: with a connection
'machinename\instancename' i get no connection ('server not found or accss
denied'); however with the same setup and a connection
'172.0.30.14\instancename' everything works as expected. I can use an alias
for the IP number and that works but an alias for the machine name does not.
With a DHCP server, the IP address isn't permanent so how do I configure the
connection in my application?
More info - Colleagues have suggested that this is a simple DNS problem. But
I can connect to the machine using the DNS names in other apps (e.g. 'my
network Places') - it's just SQL that won't connect.
"quilkin" wrote:

> Running MSDE2000A named instance on an XP Pro machine as part of a domain
> (W2003 server) , connecting from a client: with a connection
> 'machinename\instancename' i get no connection ('server not found or accss
> denied'); however with the same setup and a connection
> '172.0.30.14\instancename' everything works as expected. I can use an alias
> for the IP number and that works but an alias for the machine name does not.
> With a DHCP server, the IP address isn't permanent so how do I configure the
> connection in my application?

Can connect with IP number but not with machine name

Running MSDE2000A named instance on an XP Pro machine as part of a domain
(W2003 server) , connecting from a client: with a connection
'machinename\instancename' i get no connection ('server not found or accss
denied'); however with the same setup and a connection
'172.0.30.14\instancename' everything works as expected. I can use an alias
for the IP number and that works but an alias for the machine name does not.
With a DHCP server, the IP address isn't permanent so how do I configure the
connection in my application?More info - Colleagues have suggested that this is a simple DNS problem. But
I can connect to the machine using the DNS names in other apps (e.g. 'my
network Places') - it's just SQL that won't connect.
"quilkin" wrote:

> Running MSDE2000A named instance on an XP Pro machine as part of a domain
> (W2003 server) , connecting from a client: with a connection
> 'machinename\instancename' i get no connection ('server not found or accss
> denied'); however with the same setup and a connection
> '172.0.30.14\instancename' everything works as expected. I can use an alia
s
> for the IP number and that works but an alias for the machine name does no
t.
> With a DHCP server, the IP address isn't permanent so how do I configure t
he
> connection in my application?

Can connect with IP number but not with machine name

Running MSDE2000A named instance on an XP Pro machine as part of a domain
(W2003 server) , connecting from a client: with a connection
'machinename\instancename' i get no connection ('server not found or accss
denied'); however with the same setup and a connection
'172.0.30.14\instancename' everything works as expected. I can use an alias
for the IP number and that works but an alias for the machine name does not.
With a DHCP server, the IP address isn't permanent so how do I configure the
connection in my application?More info - Colleagues have suggested that this is a simple DNS problem. But
I can connect to the machine using the DNS names in other apps (e.g. 'my
network Places') - it's just SQL that won't connect.
"quilkin" wrote:
> Running MSDE2000A named instance on an XP Pro machine as part of a domain
> (W2003 server) , connecting from a client: with a connection
> 'machinename\instancename' i get no connection ('server not found or accss
> denied'); however with the same setup and a connection
> '172.0.30.14\instancename' everything works as expected. I can use an alias
> for the IP number and that works but an alias for the machine name does not.
> With a DHCP server, the IP address isn't permanent so how do I configure the
> connection in my application?

Can coexist express server 2005 with sql 7 in the same machine?

I have SQL server 7 installed and running ok. Can I install express server? The idea is to have two different databases for different applications, each running in each sql.In short yes, but only one can be the default instance, Express will need to be a named instance

can avoid this rollback ??

Hi,
We're testing Transactional replication with updatable subscriber. We have
kept a machine @.branch office which is the publisher and the subscriber is at
the head office. Publisher is win 2003 server with win 2000 sp4 and
subscriber is a cluster with win 2003 and sql 2000 sp3. For small commands
replication is quick but for some specific processes invloving many
transactions, the replication backlog is huge.
We used profiler and found that there is a table whci is deleted completely
during the process and populated again with current data. The table has
almost 80 thousand rows. The profiler shows that sp_MSdel is run for every
row and then sp_MSins is run to insert data. this process takes lot of time
and creates backlog.
After the table got repopulated at subscriber and replication procs started
inserting data in another table, the publisher machine got switched off
accidently by a person at branch. When we started the machine next time, the
second tables at subscriber was empty and the profiler showed that again the
sp_MSdel was being executed at subscriber.
Does this mean that , during the process, if ne of the participating machine
is not available, the whole process will be restarted?
Why it strts with the table it had already replicated?can I stop this?
Ne suggestions?
regards,
have a look at the transaction on the publisher which caused this process.
It is probably a large update statement which is not being done as an update
in place on the subscriber, but rather being decomposed into a series of
delete and then update statements. See if you can identify if this action
was initiated by a stored procedure on the publisher and if so consider
replicating the execution of this stored procedure. You might also want to
look at using the trace flag mentioned in the following kb article which
will force an update in place.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302341/EN-US/
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"k_s" <ks@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:40CEB69C-0E43-4A93-A89D-60A9BBFD08DE@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We're testing Transactional replication with updatable subscriber. We have
> kept a machine @.branch office which is the publisher and the subscriber is
> at
> the head office. Publisher is win 2003 server with win 2000 sp4 and
> subscriber is a cluster with win 2003 and sql 2000 sp3. For small commands
> replication is quick but for some specific processes invloving many
> transactions, the replication backlog is huge.
> We used profiler and found that there is a table whci is deleted
> completely
> during the process and populated again with current data. The table has
> almost 80 thousand rows. The profiler shows that sp_MSdel is run for every
> row and then sp_MSins is run to insert data. this process takes lot of
> time
> and creates backlog.
> After the table got repopulated at subscriber and replication procs
> started
> inserting data in another table, the publisher machine got switched off
> accidently by a person at branch. When we started the machine next time,
> the
> second tables at subscriber was empty and the profiler showed that again
> the
> sp_MSdel was being executed at subscriber.
> Does this mean that , during the process, if ne of the participating
> machine
> is not available, the whole process will be restarted?
> Why it strts with the table it had already replicated?can I stop this?
> Ne suggestions?
> regards,
|||Thanks for the prompt reply Hilary.
The process is actually deleting a table completely and then inserting rows
into it. This is done by a stored procedure.
Could u give me ne link to get more idea about the 'replicatin execution of
sp'.
We told the application maintenance guys this issue, anmd asked them to
change the logic to update instead of competely emptying the table.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> have a look at the transaction on the publisher which caused this process.
> It is probably a large update statement which is not being done as an update
> in place on the subscriber, but rather being decomposed into a series of
> delete and then update statements. See if you can identify if this action
> was initiated by a stored procedure on the publisher and if so consider
> replicating the execution of this stored procedure. You might also want to
> look at using the trace flag mentioned in the following kb article which
> will force an update in place.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302341/EN-US/
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
> "k_s" <ks@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:40CEB69C-0E43-4A93-A89D-60A9BBFD08DE@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Is it possible that you are doing a cascading update of the entire table or
a large portion of it?
Regarding replicating the execution of stored procedures have a look at
Publishing Stored Procedure Execution in BOL.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"k_s" <ks@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:35203F89-5688-497D-B46B-F8D5B85728A1@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Thanks for the prompt reply Hilary.
> The process is actually deleting a table completely and then inserting
> rows
> into it. This is done by a stored procedure.
> Could u give me ne link to get more idea about the 'replicatin execution
> of
> sp'.
> We told the application maintenance guys this issue, anmd asked them to
> change the logic to update instead of competely emptying the table.
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
|||Couldn't get u. Presently it's not update. It's a history table which
maintens one day history. So everyday, it is cleared and working table's data
is shifted ti it
I saw and tried the sp execution , works well. But in my case it won't fit,
as I have my procedure calling another procedure and BOL says that won't b
supported.
: (
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> Is it possible that you are doing a cascading update of the entire table or
> a large portion of it?
> Regarding replicating the execution of stored procedures have a look at
> Publishing Stored Procedure Execution in BOL.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
> "k_s" <ks@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:35203F89-5688-497D-B46B-F8D5B85728A1@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Can aspnetdb.mdf be moved from development to production machine?

1.) Can an aspnetdb.mdf database be configured and setup on one server and then be moved to a production server or is there something machine specific that keeps this from being possible?
2.) Is putting this file in the app_data folder something that is used only for SQL 2005 or SQL express? I had to set up a connection string in my SQL 2000 installation to get the connection to work.

Thanks for any input!

Colelaus

aspnetdb.mdf is the default sql express database created, if you want to move it onto production, your production server has to install sql express and reference it in your connection string|||

I'm using aspnetdb.mdf as my security database but not SQL Express due to llimitations on the server. I guess my question is really is there anything that is generated in the database when setting up security that is machine specific that would keep the database from being moved from one machine to another?

If it is machine specific, it would require as you referenced, me to recreate on the production server and reset all the users again.

Colelaus

|||

Hi Colelaus,

If your production server provides SQL server other editions than the Express edition, you will need to have the .mdf database files attach to server manually, since other edtions of SQL server does not support attaching database files automatically at runtime.

Also, you will need to modify your connection string and make it look like "Data Source=ServerName\InstanceName;Initial Catelog=DatabaseName". It points to a database on server instead of a .mdf file.For other information, you will need to contact the hosting service.

The tool you may use : Aspnet_regsql.exe ( More details about the tool, pls visit http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms229862(VS.80).aspx )

Thanks.

|||

Thanks. That is exactly the info I needed.

Colelaus

Can an ASP.NET application running on WinXP+IIS5 access to SSRS web service?

Hi,
I am developing a web application on windows XP. A page within my
application needs to access to SSRS running on the same machine. Once the
web application tries to consume the SSRS web services, I receive the
following error:
System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: The permissions granted to user
DEV1\ASPNET' are insufficient for performing this operation. -->
Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.AccessDeniedException: The
permissions granted to user 'ALISGD\ASPNET' are insufficient for performing
this operation.
The user DEV1\ASPNET is member of
"SQLServer2005ReportingServicesWebServiceUser$DEV1" local NT groups. Also I
added the user "DEV1\ASPNET" to browsers and also "System Administrator"
role within SSRS web portal. still the same problem.
I do have the following code on my web service proxy code:
reportingService.UseDefaultCredentials = true;
Obviously I can solve the problem by using this code:
System.Net.ICredentials netCredential = new
System.Net.NetworkCredential("Username","Password","Domain");
reportingService.Credentials = netCredential;
But I like to find the root of the problem and solve it properly.
Is there any way that a web application running on IIS5+XP as user "ASPNET'
access to SSRS web service?
Any help would be appreciated,
MaxHello Max,
Please check the following settings:
1. Make sure the ASPNET account is under the RSExec Role in MASTER, MSDB,
ReportServer, ReportTempDB database.
2. Go to Local Policy. For "Act as part of Operating System", added ASPNET
and SYSTEM. For "Impersonate a client after authentication", added SYSTEM.
3. Restarted IIS and RS.
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.|||Hi ,
How is everything going? Please feel free to let me know if you need any
assistance.
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.|||Hi Wei,
I have users who don't have "Act as part of Operating System", and they can
work with SSRS web services.
"Act as part of Operating System" works, but I expect there is less
previlage setting for ASPNET user that can intercat with SSRS.
Kind Regards,
Max
"Wei Lu [MSFT]" <weilu@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:NR0QuNn0HHA.4844@.TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl...
> Hi ,
> How is everything going? Please feel free to let me know if you need any
> assistance.
> 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.
>|||Hello Max,
I would like to know what permission your other user have.
If you don't grant the "Act as part of Operating System", did this issue
appeared?
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.|||Hi ,
How is everything going? Please feel free to let me know if you need any
assistance.
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.

Can 6.5, 7.0 and 2000 all co-exist on same machine ?

I'm currently running SQL Server 6.5 and 7.0 together on the same
machine (i.e. switchable using the program switcher). Does anyone
know if i can install SQL Server 2000 to run alongside both of these?

Thanks in anticipation.
RobRob wrote:
> I'm currently running SQL Server 6.5 and 7.0 together on the same
> machine (i.e. switchable using the program switcher). Does anyone
> know if i can install SQL Server 2000 to run alongside both of these?

7.0 and 2000 certainly can, if you install 2000 as a named instance. As to
whether 6.5 and 7.0 can co-exist, 6.5 is so ancient I can't recall. I do
believe there was some utility to switch between the two on the same
machine, but not so much both available simultaneously.

--
Steve Troxell|||Steve,
Thanks, i've inherited an old 6.5 database i'd like to keep a copy of
and also run 7 & 2000. Anyway think i've found the answer on the web:

<quote>
If both SQL Server 7.0 and 6.5 are installed on the computer and
coexist by means of a version switch and you don't want to upgrade an
existing installation, you can safely install named instances of SQL
Server 2000 on the same machine and host all three versions on the
same computer. However, only one of the versions (i.e., 7.0 or 6.5)
that coexist by means of a version switch can run at one time, whereas
all named instances can run simultaneously.
</quote
Rob

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:43:56 GMT, "Steve Troxell"
<steve_troxell@.nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:

>Rob wrote:
>> I'm currently running SQL Server 6.5 and 7.0 together on the same
>> machine (i.e. switchable using the program switcher). Does anyone
>> know if i can install SQL Server 2000 to run alongside both of these?
>7.0 and 2000 certainly can, if you install 2000 as a named instance. As to
>whether 6.5 and 7.0 can co-exist, 6.5 is so ancient I can't recall. I do
>believe there was some utility to switch between the two on the same
>machine, but not so much both available simultaneously.

Can 2000 and 2005 coexist?

I need to manage a couple of SQL 2000 servers and a couple of 2005 servers
from a single "admin" machine. I currently have just 2000 (server & client
tools) installed on the admin machine. Is it possible to install (not
upgrade) SQL 2005 on the admin machine? (Preferably I'd like to install
both the 2005 server and client tools) Any suggestions on how to achieve
having both versions installed on the same machine?
Thank you,
Ben
Yes. I had 2000 with two instances on my machine. I installed 2005 with one (named) instance and my
2000 tools are still there. I did get a new program group with 2005 tools.
I can now admin 7.0 and 2000 servers using EM 2000.
And I can manage 2000 and 2005 servers using Management Studio.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ben Amada" <ben@.REpoMOweVErpick.com> wrote in message news:OL2oKXd5FHA.620@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I need to manage a couple of SQL 2000 servers and a couple of 2005 servers from a single "admin"
>machine. I currently have just 2000 (server & client tools) installed on the admin machine. Is it
>possible to install (not upgrade) SQL 2005 on the admin machine? (Preferably I'd like to install
>both the 2005 server and client tools) Any suggestions on how to achieve having both versions
>installed on the same machine?
> Thank you,
> Ben
>
|||Tibor Karaszi wrote:

> Yes. I had 2000 with two instances on my machine. I installed 2005 with
> one (named) instance and my 2000 tools are still there. I did get a new
> program group with 2005 tools. I can now admin 7.0 and 2000 servers using
> EM 2000.
> And I can manage 2000 and 2005 servers using Management Studio.
That's very good news that it is possible. As soon as I get a chance, I'll
give it a try and see what happens.
Thanks,
Ben

Can 2000 and 2005 coexist?

I need to manage a couple of SQL 2000 servers and a couple of 2005 servers
from a single "admin" machine. I currently have just 2000 (server & client
tools) installed on the admin machine. Is it possible to install (not
upgrade) SQL 2005 on the admin machine? (Preferably I'd like to install
both the 2005 server and client tools) Any suggestions on how to achieve
having both versions installed on the same machine?
Thank you,
BenYes. I had 2000 with two instances on my machine. I installed 2005 with one (named) instance and my
2000 tools are still there. I did get a new program group with 2005 tools.
I can now admin 7.0 and 2000 servers using EM 2000.
And I can manage 2000 and 2005 servers using Management Studio.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ben Amada" <ben@.REpoMOweVErpick.com> wrote in message news:OL2oKXd5FHA.620@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I need to manage a couple of SQL 2000 servers and a couple of 2005 servers from a single "admin"
>machine. I currently have just 2000 (server & client tools) installed on the admin machine. Is it
>possible to install (not upgrade) SQL 2005 on the admin machine? (Preferably I'd like to install
>both the 2005 server and client tools) Any suggestions on how to achieve having both versions
>installed on the same machine?
> Thank you,
> Ben
>|||Tibor Karaszi wrote:
> Yes. I had 2000 with two instances on my machine. I installed 2005 with
> one (named) instance and my 2000 tools are still there. I did get a new
> program group with 2005 tools. I can now admin 7.0 and 2000 servers using
> EM 2000.
> And I can manage 2000 and 2005 servers using Management Studio.
That's very good news that it is possible. As soon as I get a chance, I'll
give it a try and see what happens.
Thanks,
Ben

Can 2000 and 2005 coexist?

I need to manage a couple of SQL 2000 servers and a couple of 2005 servers
from a single "admin" machine. I currently have just 2000 (server & client
tools) installed on the admin machine. Is it possible to install (not
upgrade) SQL 2005 on the admin machine? (Preferably I'd like to install
both the 2005 server and client tools) Any suggestions on how to achieve
having both versions installed on the same machine?
Thank you,
BenYes. I had 2000 with two instances on my machine. I installed 2005 with one
(named) instance and my
2000 tools are still there. I did get a new program group with 2005 tools.
I can now admin 7.0 and 2000 servers using EM 2000.
And I can manage 2000 and 2005 servers using Management Studio.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Ben Amada" <ben@.REpoMOweVErpick.com> wrote in message news:OL2oKXd5FHA.620@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx
.gbl...
>I need to manage a couple of SQL 2000 servers and a couple of 2005 servers
from a single "admin"
>machine. I currently have just 2000 (server & client tools) installed on t
he admin machine. Is it
>possible to install (not upgrade) SQL 2005 on the admin machine? (Preferab
ly I'd like to install
>both the 2005 server and client tools) Any suggestions on how to achieve h
aving both versions
>installed on the same machine?
> Thank you,
> Ben
>|||Tibor Karaszi wrote:

> Yes. I had 2000 with two instances on my machine. I installed 2005 with
> one (named) instance and my 2000 tools are still there. I did get a new
> program group with 2005 tools. I can now admin 7.0 and 2000 servers using
> EM 2000.
> And I can manage 2000 and 2005 servers using Management Studio.
That's very good news that it is possible. As soon as I get a chance, I'll
give it a try and see what happens.
Thanks,
Ben

Can .NET Application access SQL 2005 Express remotely?

I am tring to access the SQL 2005 Express which installed in remote machine. Front end app is on Visual Studio 2005. Try to connect SQL Express using the application Layer which is installed on the computer where SQL Express is installed. Could not fetch data from the SQL Express. What could be the problem?

With Regards,

ADK

hi,

SQLExpress installs by default disabling remote connections..

have a look at the resources listed by Arnie,

Configuration -Configure SQL Server 2005 to allow remote connections
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;914277
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlexpress/archive/2005/05/05/415084.aspx

Configuration -Connect to SQL Express from "downlevel clients"
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlexpress/archive/2004/07/23/192044.aspx

Configuration -Connect to SQL Express and ‘Stay Connected’
http://betav.com/blog/billva/2006/06/getting_and_staying_connected.html

Configuration - Guideline for Connectivity Question Posting
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=362498&SiteID=1

regards

Can "Windows Authentication" be used for SQL in distributed env.?

Hi all, we are about to move our SQL Server database onto a different machin
e from the machine that houses our web server (IIS). Currently our web appl
ication uses "windows authentication" - but once we move it to a different m
achine will we have to chan
ge the security mode? Or is there another way for our web server machine to
flow the identity to the other machine.
I tried looking this issue up online - but I saw no reference to it. I did
find this:
databasesecurity.asp" target="_blank">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...asesecurity.asp
and it seems that the advice from Microsoft is that if you just create an id
entical account on both machines (including password) you can effectively co
nnect from the one machine to the other.
Or have I misunderstood?
Thanks for any advice,
NoviceYes. Either the web server could connect as the IUSR account, or if both
machines are in a domain, you could enable Security Delegation to allow the
end users credentials to pass thru and connect using Windows
Authentication. It depends on the security requirements of your
application and the environment.
Thanks,
Kevin McDonnell
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.