Server Build Help

[Diego]

Hello,

I have seen that it is possible to install SQL Server 2000 on top of
Windows Server 2003 as long as it is SP3 or later (would be SP4 since
that is the current one). Is that correct? Are there any tricks to
it? Also, would there be any problems if IIS was configured on the
server as well (so one server would have WIndows Server 2003 with IIS
configured and SQL Server 2000). Would there be any problems with
this setup? Would it be difficult to setup a failover server or
clustering? Is it better to have two separate servers? If so, why?

Thanks for your help,
Diego

 

[SBS Rocker]

"Diego" <newtothadu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185555261.713873.229490@l70g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Hello,
>
> I have seen that it is possible to install SQL Server 2000 on top of
> Windows Server 2003 as long as it is SP3 or later (would be SP4 since
> that is the current one). Is that correct? Are there any tricks to
> it?

That is correct. Only trick is if you want to go to SQL 2000 SP4 you must
apply SP3 first.

Also, would there be any problems if IIS was configured on the
> server as well (so one server would have WIndows Server 2003 with IIS
> configured and SQL Server 2000). Would there be any problems with
> this setup?

No problem at all as long as you have the horsepower to do so.

Would it be difficult to setup a failover server or clustering? Is it
better to have two separate servers? If so, why?

No difficult. Two seperate servers for what? Fail over or to balance the
application loads.


> Thanks for your help,
> Diego
>

 

[Andrew Sword [MVP]]

SQL and IIS will work togeather. It's appropriate to seperate the aplication
on to different servers if there is allot of load.

"Diego" wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have seen that it is possible to install SQL Server 2000 on top of
> Windows Server 2003 as long as it is SP3 or later (would be SP4 since
> that is the current one). Is that correct? Are there any tricks to
> it? Also, would there be any problems if IIS was configured on the
> server as well (so one server would have WIndows Server 2003 with IIS
> configured and SQL Server 2000). Would there be any problems with
> this setup? Would it be difficult to setup a failover server or
> clustering? Is it better to have two separate servers? If so, why?
>
> Thanks for your help,
> Diego
>
>

 

[Diego]

Thank you for the responses.

Diego


On Jul 28, 6:44 am, Andrew Sword [MVP]
<AndrewSword...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> SQL and IIS will work togeather. It's appropriate to seperate the aplication
> on to different servers if there is allot of load.
>
>
>
> "Diego" wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> > I have seen that it is possible to install SQL Server 2000 on top of
> > Windows Server 2003 as long as it is SP3 or later (would be SP4 since
> > that is the current one). Is that correct? Are there any tricks to
> > it? Also, would there be any problems if IIS was configured on the
> > server as well (so one server would have WIndows Server 2003 with IIS
> > configured and SQL Server 2000). Would there be any problems with
> > this setup? Would it be difficult to setup a failover server or
> > clustering? Is it better to have two separate servers? If so, why?
>
> > Thanks for your help,
> > Diego- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -