We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
(dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved reports -
the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename (dbo).
It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
Thanks
Maybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
"exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
> We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
> We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
> When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
> (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
> reports -
> the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
> (dbo).
> It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
> Thanks
|||Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine -
no (dbo)
Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
Thank you
"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
> Maybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
> CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
> so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
> "exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||It's related to the security context you are using in the
ADP and what permissions that login, user has in SQL Server.
And it's handled a bit differently with different version of
Access - but I don't remember what they changed with 2002
and above from Access 2000.
I know that in Access 2000, if you connect as a sysadmin,
you won't see the dbo appended. All others will see dbo. You
can't remove dbo from everything, you should be creating the
Access objects to use fully qualified names using
Owner.Object.
This is more of an Access issue so you would want to post in
an Access newsgroup. Try:
microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver
-Sue
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:13:29 -0800, exchangerookie1994
<exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
>this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine -
>no (dbo)
>Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
>Thank you
>"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
Showing posts with label old. Show all posts
Showing posts with label old. Show all posts
Thursday, March 8, 2012
ADP project on SQL 2000 sp4
We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
(dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved reports -
the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename (dbo).
It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
ThanksMaybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
"exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
> We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
> We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
> When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
> (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
> reports -
> the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
> (dbo).
> It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
> Thanks|||Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine -
no (dbo)
Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
Thank you
"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
> Maybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
> CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
> so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
> "exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
> > We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
> > We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
> > When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
> > (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
> > reports -
> > the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
> > (dbo).
> > It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
> >
> > Thanks
>
>|||It's related to the security context you are using in the
ADP and what permissions that login, user has in SQL Server.
And it's handled a bit differently with different version of
Access - but I don't remember what they changed with 2002
and above from Access 2000.
I know that in Access 2000, if you connect as a sysadmin,
you won't see the dbo appended. All others will see dbo. You
can't remove dbo from everything, you should be creating the
Access objects to use fully qualified names using
Owner.Object.
This is more of an Access issue so you would want to post in
an Access newsgroup. Try:
microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver
-Sue
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:13:29 -0800, exchangerookie1994
<exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
>this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine -
>no (dbo)
>Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
>Thank you
>"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
>> Maybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
>> CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
>> so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
>> "exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
>> > We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
>> > We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
>> > When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
>> > (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
>> > reports -
>> > the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
>> > (dbo).
>> > It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>>
>>
We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
(dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved reports -
the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename (dbo).
It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
ThanksMaybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
"exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
> We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
> We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
> When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
> (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
> reports -
> the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
> (dbo).
> It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
> Thanks|||Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine -
no (dbo)
Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
Thank you
"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
> Maybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
> CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
> so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
> "exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
> > We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
> > We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
> > When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
> > (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
> > reports -
> > the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
> > (dbo).
> > It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
> >
> > Thanks
>
>|||It's related to the security context you are using in the
ADP and what permissions that login, user has in SQL Server.
And it's handled a bit differently with different version of
Access - but I don't remember what they changed with 2002
and above from Access 2000.
I know that in Access 2000, if you connect as a sysadmin,
you won't see the dbo appended. All others will see dbo. You
can't remove dbo from everything, you should be creating the
Access objects to use fully qualified names using
Owner.Object.
This is more of an Access issue so you would want to post in
an Access newsgroup. Try:
microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver
-Sue
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:13:29 -0800, exchangerookie1994
<exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
>this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine -
>no (dbo)
>Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
>Thank you
>"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
>> Maybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
>> CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
>> so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
>> "exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
>> > We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
>> > We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
>> > When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
>> > (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
>> > reports -
>> > the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
>> > (dbo).
>> > It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>>
>>
ADP project on SQL 2000 sp4
We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
(dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved reports
-
the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename (dbo).
It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
ThanksMaybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
"exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
> We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
> We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
> When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
> (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
> reports -
> the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
> (dbo).
> It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
> Thanks|||Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine
-
no (dbo)
Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
Thank you
"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
> Maybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
> CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
> so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted f
or
> "exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in
> message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||It's related to the security context you are using in the
ADP and what permissions that login, user has in SQL Server.
And it's handled a bit differently with different version of
Access - but I don't remember what they changed with 2002
and above from Access 2000.
I know that in Access 2000, if you connect as a sysadmin,
you won't see the dbo appended. All others will see dbo. You
can't remove dbo from everything, you should be creating the
Access objects to use fully qualified names using
Owner.Object.
This is more of an Access issue so you would want to post in
an Access newsgroup. Try:
microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver
-Sue
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:13:29 -0800, exchangerookie1994
<exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
>this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine
-
>no (dbo)
>Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
>Thank you
>"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
>
We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
(dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved reports
-
the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename (dbo).
It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
ThanksMaybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted for
"exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
> We currently have a adp project linked with a Sql server 7 running NT4.
> We need to replace old server with a win server 2003 with SQL 2000 sp4.
> When viewing tables, stored procedures from ADP project all objects have
> (dbo) after them. I then run into problems when trying to run saved
> reports -
> the report is looking for the table name itself instead of tablename
> (dbo).
> It would be a lot of work to fix all of the reports.
> Thanks|||Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine
-
no (dbo)
Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
Thank you
"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
> Maybe you should create a view to meet client tool demands:
> CREATE VIEW [table1 (dbo)] AS SELECT * FROM table1
> so reports will access table1 through the view with the name they wanted f
or
> "exchangerookie1994" <exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in
> message news:03F79A1A-56AF-4440-BE3B-27C00AF3FB93@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||It's related to the security context you are using in the
ADP and what permissions that login, user has in SQL Server.
And it's handled a bit differently with different version of
Access - but I don't remember what they changed with 2002
and above from Access 2000.
I know that in Access 2000, if you connect as a sysadmin,
you won't see the dbo appended. All others will see dbo. You
can't remove dbo from everything, you should be creating the
Access objects to use fully qualified names using
Owner.Object.
This is more of an Access issue so you would want to post in
an Access newsgroup. Try:
microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver
-Sue
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 08:13:29 -0800, exchangerookie1994
<exchangerookie1994@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Is there a way to remove the (dbo) from everything. Do you know what causes
>this. I tried the exact same thing on a SQL 2000 sp3 and eveything was fine
-
>no (dbo)
>Should I run another instance of SQL 2000 with sp3 instead?
>Thank you
>"Alex Cieszinski" wrote:
>
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Administering SQl 2000 from SQL 2005
I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the application
that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
--
BettieYou can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
improved" features won't work however
like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
leaves them there by default).
rgrds
rafael
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie|||No problems. I am using SQL 2005 Management studio to manage couple of my
SQL 2000 servers.
But the other way will not work out...
Thanks
Hari
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie|||Thanks -- I'll try the upgrade in the lab.
--
Bettie
"Rafael Lenartowicz" wrote:
> You can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
> improved" features won't work however
> like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
> By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
> upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
> the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
> leaves them there by default).
> rgrds
> rafael
>
> "Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
> >I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
> >application
> > that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> > any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> > --
> > Bettie
>
>
that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
--
BettieYou can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
improved" features won't work however
like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
leaves them there by default).
rgrds
rafael
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie|||No problems. I am using SQL 2005 Management studio to manage couple of my
SQL 2000 servers.
But the other way will not work out...
Thanks
Hari
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie|||Thanks -- I'll try the upgrade in the lab.
--
Bettie
"Rafael Lenartowicz" wrote:
> You can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
> improved" features won't work however
> like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
> By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
> upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
> the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
> leaves them there by default).
> rgrds
> rafael
>
> "Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
> >I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
> >application
> > that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> > any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> > --
> > Bettie
>
>
Administering SQl 2000 from SQL 2005
I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the application
that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
Bettie
You can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
improved" features won't work however
like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
leaves them there by default).
rgrds
rafael
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie
|||No problems. I am using SQL 2005 Management studio to manage couple of my
SQL 2000 servers.
But the other way will not work out...
Thanks
Hari
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie
|||Thanks -- I'll try the upgrade in the lab.
Bettie
"Rafael Lenartowicz" wrote:
> You can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
> improved" features won't work however
> like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
> By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
> upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
> the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
> leaves them there by default).
> rgrds
> rafael
>
> "Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>
>
that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
Bettie
You can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
improved" features won't work however
like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
leaves them there by default).
rgrds
rafael
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie
|||No problems. I am using SQL 2005 Management studio to manage couple of my
SQL 2000 servers.
But the other way will not work out...
Thanks
Hari
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie
|||Thanks -- I'll try the upgrade in the lab.
Bettie
"Rafael Lenartowicz" wrote:
> You can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
> improved" features won't work however
> like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
> By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
> upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
> the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
> leaves them there by default).
> rgrds
> rafael
>
> "Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>
>
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Administering SQl 2000 from SQL 2005
I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the application
that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
--
BettieYou can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
improved" features won't work however
like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
leaves them there by default).
rgrds
rafael
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie|||No problems. I am using SQL 2005 Management studio to manage couple of my
SQL 2000 servers.
But the other way will not work out...
Thanks
Hari
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie|||Thanks -- I'll try the upgrade in the lab.
--
Bettie
"Rafael Lenartowicz" wrote:
> You can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
> improved" features won't work however
> like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
> By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
> upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
> the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
> leaves them there by default).
> rgrds
> rafael
>
> "Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>
>
that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
--
BettieYou can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
improved" features won't work however
like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
leaves them there by default).
rgrds
rafael
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie|||No problems. I am using SQL 2005 Management studio to manage couple of my
SQL 2000 servers.
But the other way will not work out...
Thanks
Hari
"Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>I have some old SQL servers that I cannot upgrade becuase of the
>application
> that uses them. Can I manage these servers from SQL 2005? IF so, are there
> any known gotchas? Thanks in advance.
> --
> Bettie|||Thanks -- I'll try the upgrade in the lab.
--
Bettie
"Rafael Lenartowicz" wrote:
> You can do all most common tasks using the new 2005 Studio, the "new and
> improved" features won't work however
> like i.e. Preformance Tunning Wizard.
> By the way - I haven't seen any issues with my "legacy" application after
> upgrading to 2005 server, as long as you keep
> the specific databases on SQL2000's compatibility level (uprgade process
> leaves them there by default).
> rgrds
> rafael
>
> "Bettie Claxton" <BettieClaxton@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:0E984055-B655-4094-91A5-5B45C998545B@.microsoft.com...
>
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)