Multiple versions of SQL Server 2005 - What order to install?

I currently have three SQL Server instances installed on my notebook. One is v8, which I believe is used by an accounting application. The other two are as follows:-

SQL Server MSSMLBIZ

SQL Server SQLEXPRESS

The second one (SQLEXPRESS) fails to start generating the following error:-

The SQL Server (SQLEXPRESS) service terminated with service-specific error 17058 (0x42A2).

Other services listed in SQL Server Configuration Manager are:-

SQL Server Integration Services - which runs apparently normally.

SQL Server Analysis Services (MSSQLSERVER)

SQL Server Reporting Services (MSSQLSERVER)

SQL Server Browser

The last thre of these are run under LocalSystem.

I have been trying to install the SQLServer SP2 to the SQLEXPRESS instance for some number of days now, but each time it runs, it fails to install.

I am beginning to wonder if there is a sequence of installation for each of the above instances that should be followed. Can anyone give me any suggestions, or answers to the above problems?

Thanks,

It may be that the SQL Server Express installation is not using a 'good' login account.

Go to [Control Panel], [Admin Tools], [Services]. Find the SQLExpress instance, and double-click, then select the [Log On] tab. Select 'Local System Account', and start the service.

If it does not start, you need to uninstall and then re-install SQL Express.

If it does start up. refer to these articles about properly setting up a service account.

Configuration -Service Accounts, SQL Server 2005 - Setting Up Windows Service Accounts
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143691.aspx
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143504.aspx

|||

You might try changing the problem service to start by using the local system...

Multiple SQL Instances and Server Specs?

Can't really recommend any server specs for you. But we have been running
multiple SQL instances on 4-processor HP DL580 and 4- or 8-processor DL585
with 8GB of RAM.
Why do you decide to run 5 instances?
Linchi
"Transam388" wrote:

> I am relatively new to SQL but am looking into setting up a SQL server wit
h
> multiple instances on it. To start with there will probably be about 5
> instances. With the databases being of moderate size and traffic, what ki
nd
> of systems specs do the "Real World" DBAs recommend? We will do the separ
ate
> disk subsystems for the DB's and the log files but what kind of memory and
> processor/ processors do you feel should be used? I know this is a classi
c
> vague question but tell me from those of you who have worked with a multip
le
> instance SQL system what server specs you recommend. Thanks!Essentially instead of buying a new license for each server, just getting a
per processor license on one system and then still having the groups be able
to have separate security and such in the instances. Thanks for the input
though this is what I wanted to see.
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Can't really recommend any server specs for you. But we have been running
> multiple SQL instances on 4-processor HP DL580 and 4- or 8-processor DL585
> with 8GB of RAM.
> Why do you decide to run 5 instances?
> Linchi
> "Transam388" wrote:
>|||I am relatively new to SQL but am looking into setting up a SQL server with
multiple instances on it. To start with there will probably be about 5
instances. With the databases being of moderate size and traffic, what kind
of systems specs do the "Real World" DBAs recommend? We will do the separat
e
disk subsystems for the DB's and the log files but what kind of memory and
processor/ processors do you feel should be used? I know this is a classic
vague question but tell me from those of you who have worked with a multiple
instance SQL system what server specs you recommend. Thanks!|||Can't really recommend any server specs for you. But we have been running
multiple SQL instances on 4-processor HP DL580 and 4- or 8-processor DL585
with 8GB of RAM.
Why do you decide to run 5 instances?
Linchi
"Transam388" wrote:

> I am relatively new to SQL but am looking into setting up a SQL server wit
h
> multiple instances on it. To start with there will probably be about 5
> instances. With the databases being of moderate size and traffic, what ki
nd
> of systems specs do the "Real World" DBAs recommend? We will do the separ
ate
> disk subsystems for the DB's and the log files but what kind of memory and
> processor/ processors do you feel should be used? I know this is a classi
c
> vague question but tell me from those of you who have worked with a multip
le
> instance SQL system what server specs you recommend. Thanks!|||Essentially instead of buying a new license for each server, just getting a
per processor license on one system and then still having the groups be able
to have separate security and such in the instances. Thanks for the input
though this is what I wanted to see.
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Can't really recommend any server specs for you. But we have been running
> multiple SQL instances on 4-processor HP DL580 and 4- or 8-processor DL585
> with 8GB of RAM.
> Why do you decide to run 5 instances?
> Linchi
> "Transam388" wrote:
>

Multiple SQL Instances and Server Specs?

I am relatively new to SQL but am looking into setting up a SQL server with
multiple instances on it. To start with there will probably be about 5
instances. With the databases being of moderate size and traffic, what kind
of systems specs do the "Real World" DBAs recommend? We will do the separate
disk subsystems for the DB's and the log files but what kind of memory and
processor/ processors do you feel should be used? I know this is a classic
vague question but tell me from those of you who have worked with a multiple
instance SQL system what server specs you recommend. Thanks!Can't really recommend any server specs for you. But we have been running
multiple SQL instances on 4-processor HP DL580 and 4- or 8-processor DL585
with 8GB of RAM.
Why do you decide to run 5 instances?
Linchi
"Transam388" wrote:
> I am relatively new to SQL but am looking into setting up a SQL server with
> multiple instances on it. To start with there will probably be about 5
> instances. With the databases being of moderate size and traffic, what kind
> of systems specs do the "Real World" DBAs recommend? We will do the separate
> disk subsystems for the DB's and the log files but what kind of memory and
> processor/ processors do you feel should be used? I know this is a classic
> vague question but tell me from those of you who have worked with a multiple
> instance SQL system what server specs you recommend. Thanks!|||Essentially instead of buying a new license for each server, just getting a
per processor license on one system and then still having the groups be able
to have separate security and such in the instances. Thanks for the input
though this is what I wanted to see.
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
> Can't really recommend any server specs for you. But we have been running
> multiple SQL instances on 4-processor HP DL580 and 4- or 8-processor DL585
> with 8GB of RAM.
> Why do you decide to run 5 instances?
> Linchi
> "Transam388" wrote:
> > I am relatively new to SQL but am looking into setting up a SQL server with
> > multiple instances on it. To start with there will probably be about 5
> > instances. With the databases being of moderate size and traffic, what kind
> > of systems specs do the "Real World" DBAs recommend? We will do the separate
> > disk subsystems for the DB's and the log files but what kind of memory and
> > processor/ processors do you feel should be used? I know this is a classic
> > vague question but tell me from those of you who have worked with a multiple
> > instance SQL system what server specs you recommend. Thanks!

MULTIPLE SQL INSTANCES

SQL 2K / WINDOWS 2003 SERVER
I have a box with 2 SQL INSTANCES and each instances with few databases.
Memory is setup to 'Use a fix memory size' and setup with half and one GB
each .
Almost 250 GB free hard-disk space and both instances using 4 processors.
I have different SQL jobs running on each instances.
My issue is , few jobs which usually runs within 4-5 hrs, running for 12-15
hrs and this is not happening always.
Checked for SQL LOCKS and found NONE.
Please advice me , how to trouble-shoot this ?
Rgds
MS-USER
Hi
Without knowing the nature of the jobs it is hard to give detailed advice,
but I would start by looking at performance monitor and try and see if there
is a bottleneck. Your may well have contention on the discs as this is a
common resource that each instance will be competing with, therefore disc
queue lengths, also if your logs and data are on the same set of discs there
potentially there would be problems even with a single instance. Another area
that may cause problems is processor affinity. You may want to change the
affinity mask and see if that helps or use the MAXDOPS hint on your queries.
You may want to read the SQL Server 2000 Performance Tuning Technical
Reference Manual ISBN ISBN 0-7356-1270-6 and Inside SQL Server 2000 by Kalen
Delaney ISBN 0-7356-0998-5
John
"MS User" wrote:

> SQL 2K / WINDOWS 2003 SERVER
> I have a box with 2 SQL INSTANCES and each instances with few databases.
> Memory is setup to 'Use a fix memory size' and setup with half and one GB
> each .
> Almost 250 GB free hard-disk space and both instances using 4 processors.
> I have different SQL jobs running on each instances.
> My issue is , few jobs which usually runs within 4-5 hrs, running for 12-15
> hrs and this is not happening always.
> Checked for SQL LOCKS and found NONE.
> Please advice me , how to trouble-shoot this ?
> Rgds
> MS-USER
>
>

multiple sql instances

i have sql server 2005 express running. during install, i had issues with a system dll that i found answers online and resolved. i am still very green, but i know much more now than i did at the time. i believe that as a result of the partial then failed installs i have multiple instances either fully or partially installed. when i am in the sql server mgmt express environment, it lists two sql engines. i only ever use one, and would like to safely remove the second without damaging or corrupting anything done with the other instance.

my reasons for wanting to do this are twofold. first, i would like to free up the drive space taken up by the second instance. (i am a stickler for clean harddrive mgmt and maintenance). second, now that i have used the software and am somewhat more familiar with it, i would consider installing a second, intentional instance so that i may attempt to better customize some of the install-time settings and configurations.

can anybody give me any pointers/ guide me in the direction of information on how to SAFELY go about this?

thank you in advance for any help.

Hi,

Do uninstall and the wizard will ask you which instance you would like to unstaill, select the one you need to remove.

Good luck!

|||

uninstall wizard lists 2 instances as MSSQLSERVER and SQLEXPRESS

SQLEXPRESS is the one i use. is MSSQLSERVER a system thing installed on all versions that i should leave alone? or am i safe to proceed?

|||

doKtorhallam:

uninstall wizard lists 2 instances as MSSQLSERVER and SQLEXPRESS

SQLEXPRESS is the one i use. is MSSQLSERVER a system thing installed on all versions that i should leave alone? or am i safe to proceed?

Hi,

Actually you have two somehow diffrent things, SQLEXPRESS which is a FREE light version of MS SQL Server 2005 which has the basic functionality and it has some limitation. In addition to MSSQLSERVER which has more features (e.g. Sql Agent for Job scheduling and DTS or SSIS).

If you are working with SQLEXPRESS only and you want to free some GB from your hard drive .. .remove the SQLSERVER instance by using the wizard .. this will not affect your SQLEXPRESS (it might remove the Management Studio from your machine but you can download it again as a seperate component from MS website).

Hope this help you.

|||

i am a little confused now. i realize i got the express edition, but where along the line could i have gotten anything above and beyond? i never shelled out the cash (because i cant afford and its only just budding into slightly more than hobby status), is it possible microsoft somehow attached a time-bomb free trial? i know i never requested such a thing.

but.... as long as its there, (even at least for now) maybe i will try and play around with it a little and check out some of the extra features it has.

so anyways, thanks, and i'll mark you as the answer.

|||

Hi doKtorhallam,

You can download a 180 days trial MS SQL Server 2005 from Microsoft website.

Hope this will help .. good luck.

MULTIPLE SQL INSTANCES

SQL 2K / WINDOWS 2003 SERVER
I have a box with 2 SQL INSTANCES and each instances with few databases.
Memory is setup to 'Use a fix memory size' and setup with half and one GB
each .
Almost 250 GB free hard-disk space and both instances using 4 processors.
I have different SQL jobs running on each instances.
My issue is , few jobs which usually runs within 4-5 hrs, running for 12-15
hrs and this is not happening always.
Checked for SQL LOCKS and found NONE.
Please advice me , how to trouble-shoot this '
Rgds
MS-USERHi
Without knowing the nature of the jobs it is hard to give detailed advice,
but I would start by looking at performance monitor and try and see if there
is a bottleneck. Your may well have contention on the discs as this is a
common resource that each instance will be competing with, therefore disc
queue lengths, also if your logs and data are on the same set of discs there
potentially there would be problems even with a single instance. Another area
that may cause problems is processor affinity. You may want to change the
affinity mask and see if that helps or use the MAXDOPS hint on your queries.
You may want to read the SQL Server 2000 Performance Tuning Technical
Reference Manual ISBN ISBN 0-7356-1270-6 and Inside SQL Server 2000 by Kalen
Delaney ISBN 0-7356-0998-5
John
"MS User" wrote:
> SQL 2K / WINDOWS 2003 SERVER
> I have a box with 2 SQL INSTANCES and each instances with few databases.
> Memory is setup to 'Use a fix memory size' and setup with half and one GB
> each .
> Almost 250 GB free hard-disk space and both instances using 4 processors.
> I have different SQL jobs running on each instances.
> My issue is , few jobs which usually runs within 4-5 hrs, running for 12-15
> hrs and this is not happening always.
> Checked for SQL LOCKS and found NONE.
> Please advice me , how to trouble-shoot this '
> Rgds
> MS-USER
>
>

MULTIPLE SQL INSTANCES

SQL 2K / WINDOWS 2003 SERVER
I have a box with 2 SQL INSTANCES and each instances with few databases.
Memory is setup to 'Use a fix memory size' and setup with half and one GB
each .
Almost 250 GB free hard-disk space and both instances using 4 processors.
I have different SQL jobs running on each instances.
My issue is , few jobs which usually runs within 4-5 hrs, running for 12-15
hrs and this is not happening always.
Checked for SQL LOCKS and found NONE.
Please advice me , how to trouble-shoot this '
Rgds
MS-USERHi
Without knowing the nature of the jobs it is hard to give detailed advice,
but I would start by looking at performance monitor and try and see if there
is a bottleneck. Your may well have contention on the discs as this is a
common resource that each instance will be competing with, therefore disc
queue lengths, also if your logs and data are on the same set of discs there
potentially there would be problems even with a single instance. Another are
a
that may cause problems is processor affinity. You may want to change the
affinity mask and see if that helps or use the MAXDOPS hint on your queries.
You may want to read the SQL Server 2000 Performance Tuning Technical
Reference Manual ISBN ISBN 0-7356-1270-6 and Inside SQL Server 2000 by Kalen
Delaney ISBN 0-7356-0998-5
John
"MS User" wrote:

> SQL 2K / WINDOWS 2003 SERVER
> I have a box with 2 SQL INSTANCES and each instances with few databases.
> Memory is setup to 'Use a fix memory size' and setup with half and one GB
> each .
> Almost 250 GB free hard-disk space and both instances using 4 processors.
> I have different SQL jobs running on each instances.
> My issue is , few jobs which usually runs within 4-5 hrs, running for 12-1
5
> hrs and this is not happening always.
> Checked for SQL LOCKS and found NONE.
> Please advice me , how to trouble-shoot this '
> Rgds
> MS-USER
>
>

Multiple RS Instances using same SQL Server repository?

Is it possible (or supported) to have multiple Report Server instances
pointing to or using the same SQL Server repository?
Thanks,
MattI wanted to clarify my objective here. We don't want a web farm scenario.
We want to work with Standard Edition and have 5 developers (who already run
VS.NET and IIS on their Win2K Pro machines) also run RS locally but run the
SQL Server repository on a DIFFERENT box that all of them point to. The
benefit is that RS will run locally and be consistent with our local IIS
model and also reduce complexity with having to copy reports and stuff
between developer's instances of the repository. Is this possible?
Thanks
"ISGADMIN" wrote:
> Is it possible (or supported) to have multiple Report Server instances
> pointing to or using the same SQL Server repository?
> Thanks,
> Matt|||Hi, ISGADMIN
From your descriptions, I understood that you would like to connect to a
remote repository database. Have I understood you? Correct me if I was
wrong.
Yes, it is possible to do so. You could use rsconfig.exe to sepcify this
like the command line below
rsconfig -c"c:\program files\microsoft sql server\mssql\reporting
services\reportserver\rsreportserver.config"
-s<RemoteRepositoryDatabaseServerName> -dReportServer -aSQL
-u<YourAccountWithLocalAdminPermissiononForYourRemoteRepositoryDatabaseServe
rName> -p<yourpassword>
Hope this helps and please show me the error message and you detailed
command line when it fails on your side. Please refer to the Reporting
Services Books Online or MSDN links below to find more information about
reconfig.exe
rsconfig Utility
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/rsuiref/htm
/cpu_rsconfig_v1_5f1e.asp
Thank you for your patience and corperation. If you have any questions or
concerns, don't hesitate to let me know. We are here to be of assistance!
Sincerely yours,
Michael Cheng
Online Partner Support Specialist
Partner Support Group
Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
---
Get Secure! - http://www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only, many thanks!|||I don't think that is what he is asking. My feeling is that each developer
wants to have IIS locally and have all of them use the same SQL Server
repository. If so, the answer is no. They could all use the same SQL Server
and have different names for the repository (pretty sure of this, correct me
if I am wrong) but they can not all use the same repository (that by
definition is a web farm, it is just a web farm of developers but it is a
web farm).
--
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
""Michael Cheng [MSFT]"" <v-mingqc@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:ShMODr%23uEHA.3152@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> Hi, ISGADMIN
> From your descriptions, I understood that you would like to connect to a
> remote repository database. Have I understood you? Correct me if I was
> wrong.
> Yes, it is possible to do so. You could use rsconfig.exe to sepcify this
> like the command line below
> rsconfig -c"c:\program files\microsoft sql server\mssql\reporting
> services\reportserver\rsreportserver.config"
> -s<RemoteRepositoryDatabaseServerName> -dReportServer -aSQL
> -u<YourAccountWithLocalAdminPermissiononForYourRemoteRepositoryDatabaseSer
ve
> rName> -p<yourpassword>
> Hope this helps and please show me the error message and you detailed
> command line when it fails on your side. Please refer to the Reporting
> Services Books Online or MSDN links below to find more information about
> reconfig.exe
> rsconfig Utility
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/rsuiref/htm
> /cpu_rsconfig_v1_5f1e.asp
> Thank you for your patience and corperation. If you have any questions or
> concerns, don't hesitate to let me know. We are here to be of assistance!
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Michael Cheng
> Online Partner Support Specialist
> Partner Support Group
> Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
> ---
> Get Secure! - http://www.microsoft.com/security
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
> Please reply to newsgroups only, many thanks!
>|||Hi Bruce, I was just about to reply back to Michael when I got your response.
You are dead on. Nuts - I was hoping this was possible and/or supported.
Is the objective I am trying to achieve (that of each developer having the
RS server components installed locally just like we have IIS installed
locally) a "standard" practice? We wanted to do this because it seems to
mimic our production environment more. What are your thoughts on this
configuration (although based on your response, we'd have to have a separate
repository instance for each user)?
thanks guys
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> I don't think that is what he is asking. My feeling is that each developer
> wants to have IIS locally and have all of them use the same SQL Server
> repository. If so, the answer is no. They could all use the same SQL Server
> and have different names for the repository (pretty sure of this, correct me
> if I am wrong) but they can not all use the same repository (that by
> definition is a web farm, it is just a web farm of developers but it is a
> web farm).
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> ""Michael Cheng [MSFT]"" <v-mingqc@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:ShMODr%23uEHA.3152@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> > Hi, ISGADMIN
> >
> > From your descriptions, I understood that you would like to connect to a
> > remote repository database. Have I understood you? Correct me if I was
> > wrong.
> >
> > Yes, it is possible to do so. You could use rsconfig.exe to sepcify this
> > like the command line below
> >
> > rsconfig -c"c:\program files\microsoft sql server\mssql\reporting
> > services\reportserver\rsreportserver.config"
> > -s<RemoteRepositoryDatabaseServerName> -dReportServer -aSQL
> > -u<YourAccountWithLocalAdminPermissiononForYourRemoteRepositoryDatabaseSer
> ve
> > rName> -p<yourpassword>
> >
> > Hope this helps and please show me the error message and you detailed
> > command line when it fails on your side. Please refer to the Reporting
> > Services Books Online or MSDN links below to find more information about
> > reconfig.exe
> >
> > rsconfig Utility
> >
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/rsuiref/htm
> > /cpu_rsconfig_v1_5f1e.asp
> >
> > Thank you for your patience and corperation. If you have any questions or
> > concerns, don't hesitate to let me know. We are here to be of assistance!
> >
> >
> > Sincerely yours,
> >
> > Michael Cheng
> >
> > Online Partner Support Specialist
> > Partner Support Group
> > Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
> > ---
> > Get Secure! - http://www.microsoft.com/security
> >
> > This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
> > Please reply to newsgroups only, many thanks!
> >
>
>|||You need to either do this or at least have a development server. Each
developer could have their own folder on the development server. The reason
you do need this is that there are a few cases where the preview in the IDE
has difficulties so I will check it out by deploying it. Also, if you ever
need to use the jump to URL this needs to be tested with a deployed report.
SQL Server is pretty good about having a low footprint so I have not had any
difficulties in having it installed just for the repository.
--
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"ISGADMIN" <isgadmin@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
news:67318603-7A0E-4416-93D6-B8823E71AD2B@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Bruce, I was just about to reply back to Michael when I got your
response.
> You are dead on. Nuts - I was hoping this was possible and/or supported.
> Is the objective I am trying to achieve (that of each developer having the
> RS server components installed locally just like we have IIS installed
> locally) a "standard" practice? We wanted to do this because it seems to
> mimic our production environment more. What are your thoughts on this
> configuration (although based on your response, we'd have to have a
separate
> repository instance for each user)?
> thanks guys
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> > I don't think that is what he is asking. My feeling is that each
developer
> > wants to have IIS locally and have all of them use the same SQL Server
> > repository. If so, the answer is no. They could all use the same SQL
Server
> > and have different names for the repository (pretty sure of this,
correct me
> > if I am wrong) but they can not all use the same repository (that by
> > definition is a web farm, it is just a web farm of developers but it is
a
> > web farm).
> >
> > --
> > Bruce Loehle-Conger
> > MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >
> > ""Michael Cheng [MSFT]"" <v-mingqc@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
> > news:ShMODr%23uEHA.3152@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> > > Hi, ISGADMIN
> > >
> > > From your descriptions, I understood that you would like to connect to
a
> > > remote repository database. Have I understood you? Correct me if I was
> > > wrong.
> > >
> > > Yes, it is possible to do so. You could use rsconfig.exe to sepcify
this
> > > like the command line below
> > >
> > > rsconfig -c"c:\program files\microsoft sql server\mssql\reporting
> > > services\reportserver\rsreportserver.config"
> > > -s<RemoteRepositoryDatabaseServerName> -dReportServer -aSQL
> >
> -u<YourAccountWithLocalAdminPermissiononForYourRemoteRepositoryDatabaseSer
> > ve
> > > rName> -p<yourpassword>
> > >
> > > Hope this helps and please show me the error message and you detailed
> > > command line when it fails on your side. Please refer to the Reporting
> > > Services Books Online or MSDN links below to find more information
about
> > > reconfig.exe
> > >
> > > rsconfig Utility
> > >
> >
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/rsuiref/htm
> > > /cpu_rsconfig_v1_5f1e.asp
> > >
> > > Thank you for your patience and corperation. If you have any questions
or
> > > concerns, don't hesitate to let me know. We are here to be of
assistance!
> > >
> > >
> > > Sincerely yours,
> > >
> > > Michael Cheng
> > >
> > > Online Partner Support Specialist
> > > Partner Support Group
> > > Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
> > > ---
> > > Get Secure! - http://www.microsoft.com/security
> > >
> > > This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
rights.
> > > Please reply to newsgroups only, many thanks!
> > >
> >
> >
> >|||Hi Bruce and isgadmin,
Oops, I am sorry for my poor understanding.
Yes, as MVP Bruce said, it was not possible to share one repository with
multiusers on different machines. I think the workaround Bruce gives is
very helpful and I will also give this feedback to our development team
internally.
Thanks again for Bruce's kindness!
Sincerely yours,
Michael Cheng
Online Partner Support Specialist
Partner Support Group
Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
---
Get Secure! - http://www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to newsgroups only, many thanks!

Multiple RS Instances

Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine conneting to
one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have its own
database in the SQL instanceOn Aug 14, 12:58 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine conneting to
> one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have its own
> database in the SQL instance
This link should be helpful.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms403426.aspx
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. Software Consultant|||i read through the documentatation, but its not clear to me if 2 RS 05
standard ed on one machine can share the same database server but separate
databases. Unless i'm misunderstading it... any ideas?
"EMartinez" wrote:
> On Aug 14, 12:58 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine conneting to
> > one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have its own
> > database in the SQL instance
>
> This link should be helpful.
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms403426.aspx
> Regards,
> Enrique Martinez
> Sr. Software Consultant
>|||On Aug 16, 7:45 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> i read through the documentatation, but its not clear to me if 2 RS 05
> standard ed on one machine can share the same database server but separate
> databases. Unless i'm misunderstading it... any ideas?
> "EMartinez" wrote:
> > On Aug 14, 12:58 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine conneting to
> > > one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have its own
> > > database in the SQL instance
> > This link should be helpful.
> >http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms403426.aspx
> > Regards,
> > Enrique Martinez
> > Sr. Software Consultant
As far as I know, this should be fine as long as your virtual
directories for Reports and ReportServer are physically separate for
both SQL instances. Also, you will want to make sure that you have at
least one default SQL Server Instance and one named SQL Server
Instance local to SSRS. As long as your SQL Servers are not mixed
(i.e., one SQL Server 2000 and one SQL Server 2005), it should be ok.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. Software Consultant|||So am I understanding you correctly that each RS (standard ed) instance will
need to have their own SQL Server Database Instance?
Here is what my environment looks like:
WebServer has RSSite1(default) AND RSSite2(Named)
DatabaseServer has one Instance Of Sql Server called DBServ
DBServ has four databases:
RSSite1_ReportServer
RSSite1_ReportServerTempDb
RSSite2_ReportServer
RSSite2_ReportServerTempDb
I'm doing this right now, but i'm running into some issues. Just want to
know if this is supported so i can stop troubleshooting this.
Thanks
"EMartinez" wrote:
> On Aug 16, 7:45 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > i read through the documentatation, but its not clear to me if 2 RS 05
> > standard ed on one machine can share the same database server but separate
> > databases. Unless i'm misunderstading it... any ideas?
> >
> > "EMartinez" wrote:
> > > On Aug 14, 12:58 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > > Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine conneting to
> > > > one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have its own
> > > > database in the SQL instance
> >
> > > This link should be helpful.
> > >http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms403426.aspx
> >
> > > Regards,
> >
> > > Enrique Martinez
> > > Sr. Software Consultant
>
> As far as I know, this should be fine as long as your virtual
> directories for Reports and ReportServer are physically separate for
> both SQL instances. Also, you will want to make sure that you have at
> least one default SQL Server Instance and one named SQL Server
> Instance local to SSRS. As long as your SQL Servers are not mixed
> (i.e., one SQL Server 2000 and one SQL Server 2005), it should be ok.
> Regards,
> Enrique Martinez
> Sr. Software Consultant
>|||They need their own databases, not their own instance. RS 2005 should have
no problem with this at all.
From the article that Enrique provided a link to:"You can install multiple
instances of Reporting Services on the same computer. Installing multiple
instances is useful if you want to host different content for specific
sites. Each instance will have its own report server database, configuration
files, and virtual directories. "
Note it says report server database NOT instance.
--
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Marvin" <Marvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:06567929-6302-4508-8B96-80D7A02B439E@.microsoft.com...
> So am I understanding you correctly that each RS (standard ed) instance
> will
> need to have their own SQL Server Database Instance?
> Here is what my environment looks like:
> WebServer has RSSite1(default) AND RSSite2(Named)
> DatabaseServer has one Instance Of Sql Server called DBServ
> DBServ has four databases:
> RSSite1_ReportServer
> RSSite1_ReportServerTempDb
> RSSite2_ReportServer
> RSSite2_ReportServerTempDb
> I'm doing this right now, but i'm running into some issues. Just want to
> know if this is supported so i can stop troubleshooting this.
> Thanks
> "EMartinez" wrote:
>> On Aug 16, 7:45 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> > i read through the documentatation, but its not clear to me if 2 RS 05
>> > standard ed on one machine can share the same database server but
>> > separate
>> > databases. Unless i'm misunderstading it... any ideas?
>> >
>> > "EMartinez" wrote:
>> > > On Aug 14, 12:58 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> > > > Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine
>> > > > conneting to
>> > > > one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have its
>> > > > own
>> > > > database in the SQL instance
>> >
>> > > This link should be helpful.
>> > >http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms403426.aspx
>> >
>> > > Regards,
>> >
>> > > Enrique Martinez
>> > > Sr. Software Consultant
>>
>> As far as I know, this should be fine as long as your virtual
>> directories for Reports and ReportServer are physically separate for
>> both SQL instances. Also, you will want to make sure that you have at
>> least one default SQL Server Instance and one named SQL Server
>> Instance local to SSRS. As long as your SQL Servers are not mixed
>> (i.e., one SQL Server 2000 and one SQL Server 2005), it should be ok.
>> Regards,
>> Enrique Martinez
>> Sr. Software Consultant
>>|||Thank You for the clarification...I've been trying that configuration with no
luck. I'll look more into it then. Thanks.
"Marvin" wrote:
> Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine conneting to
> one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have its own
> database in the SQL instance|||Thank you for clarifying...so here's my issue.
I installed a default instance of Report Services Std on a Non-Default
Website with Sql Server on a remote machine. I implemented custom security.
No problems so far. I am able to log-in using Forms Auth and add a Folder.
Then I would install a named instance on the same webserver. Without even
touching it after install (choosing to configure later), the DEFAULT instance
returns a "Bad Request" error when trying to log in. I planned to set up the
named instance on another Website.
Any Ideas?
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> They need their own databases, not their own instance. RS 2005 should have
> no problem with this at all.
> From the article that Enrique provided a link to:"You can install multiple
> instances of Reporting Services on the same computer. Installing multiple
> instances is useful if you want to host different content for specific
> sites. Each instance will have its own report server database, configuration
> files, and virtual directories. "
> Note it says report server database NOT instance.
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "Marvin" <Marvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:06567929-6302-4508-8B96-80D7A02B439E@.microsoft.com...
> > So am I understanding you correctly that each RS (standard ed) instance
> > will
> > need to have their own SQL Server Database Instance?
> >
> > Here is what my environment looks like:
> > WebServer has RSSite1(default) AND RSSite2(Named)
> > DatabaseServer has one Instance Of Sql Server called DBServ
> > DBServ has four databases:
> > RSSite1_ReportServer
> > RSSite1_ReportServerTempDb
> > RSSite2_ReportServer
> > RSSite2_ReportServerTempDb
> >
> > I'm doing this right now, but i'm running into some issues. Just want to
> > know if this is supported so i can stop troubleshooting this.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > "EMartinez" wrote:
> >
> >> On Aug 16, 7:45 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >> > i read through the documentatation, but its not clear to me if 2 RS 05
> >> > standard ed on one machine can share the same database server but
> >> > separate
> >> > databases. Unless i'm misunderstading it... any ideas?
> >> >
> >> > "EMartinez" wrote:
> >> > > On Aug 14, 12:58 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >> > > > Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine
> >> > > > conneting to
> >> > > > one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have its
> >> > > > own
> >> > > > database in the SQL instance
> >> >
> >> > > This link should be helpful.
> >> > >http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms403426.aspx
> >> >
> >> > > Regards,
> >> >
> >> > > Enrique Martinez
> >> > > Sr. Software Consultant
> >>
> >>
> >> As far as I know, this should be fine as long as your virtual
> >> directories for Reports and ReportServer are physically separate for
> >> both SQL instances. Also, you will want to make sure that you have at
> >> least one default SQL Server Instance and one named SQL Server
> >> Instance local to SSRS. As long as your SQL Servers are not mixed
> >> (i.e., one SQL Server 2000 and one SQL Server 2005), it should be ok.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Enrique Martinez
> >> Sr. Software Consultant
> >>
> >>
>
>|||Did you use different databases for the second install of RS?
Have you checked to see what the default website is? Could it have changed
to the second installation of RS?
--
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Marvin" <Marvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7CA5523E-B6D7-4524-A3C2-DA30939B3F2B@.microsoft.com...
> Thank you for clarifying...so here's my issue.
> I installed a default instance of Report Services Std on a Non-Default
> Website with Sql Server on a remote machine. I implemented custom
> security.
> No problems so far. I am able to log-in using Forms Auth and add a Folder.
> Then I would install a named instance on the same webserver. Without even
> touching it after install (choosing to configure later), the DEFAULT
> instance
> returns a "Bad Request" error when trying to log in. I planned to set up
> the
> named instance on another Website.
> Any Ideas?
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> They need their own databases, not their own instance. RS 2005 should
>> have
>> no problem with this at all.
>> From the article that Enrique provided a link to:"You can install
>> multiple
>> instances of Reporting Services on the same computer. Installing multiple
>> instances is useful if you want to host different content for specific
>> sites. Each instance will have its own report server database,
>> configuration
>> files, and virtual directories. "
>> Note it says report server database NOT instance.
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "Marvin" <Marvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:06567929-6302-4508-8B96-80D7A02B439E@.microsoft.com...
>> > So am I understanding you correctly that each RS (standard ed) instance
>> > will
>> > need to have their own SQL Server Database Instance?
>> >
>> > Here is what my environment looks like:
>> > WebServer has RSSite1(default) AND RSSite2(Named)
>> > DatabaseServer has one Instance Of Sql Server called DBServ
>> > DBServ has four databases:
>> > RSSite1_ReportServer
>> > RSSite1_ReportServerTempDb
>> > RSSite2_ReportServer
>> > RSSite2_ReportServerTempDb
>> >
>> > I'm doing this right now, but i'm running into some issues. Just want
>> > to
>> > know if this is supported so i can stop troubleshooting this.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > "EMartinez" wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Aug 16, 7:45 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> >> > i read through the documentatation, but its not clear to me if 2 RS
>> >> > 05
>> >> > standard ed on one machine can share the same database server but
>> >> > separate
>> >> > databases. Unless i'm misunderstading it... any ideas?
>> >> >
>> >> > "EMartinez" wrote:
>> >> > > On Aug 14, 12:58 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > > > Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine
>> >> > > > conneting to
>> >> > > > one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have
>> >> > > > its
>> >> > > > own
>> >> > > > database in the SQL instance
>> >> >
>> >> > > This link should be helpful.
>> >> > >http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms403426.aspx
>> >> >
>> >> > > Regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > > Enrique Martinez
>> >> > > Sr. Software Consultant
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> As far as I know, this should be fine as long as your virtual
>> >> directories for Reports and ReportServer are physically separate for
>> >> both SQL instances. Also, you will want to make sure that you have at
>> >> least one default SQL Server Instance and one named SQL Server
>> >> Instance local to SSRS. As long as your SQL Servers are not mixed
>> >> (i.e., one SQL Server 2000 and one SQL Server 2005), it should be ok.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Enrique Martinez
>> >> Sr. Software Consultant
>> >>
>> >>
>>|||i was able to figure out my problem...i used the custom security extention
sample and during login it was returning the wrong url from one of the
methods (using WMI for some reason to get the url). i just overrid that and
got the correct value from web.config. all is well. thank you for taking the
time to help me.
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> Did you use different databases for the second install of RS?
> Have you checked to see what the default website is? Could it have changed
> to the second installation of RS?
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "Marvin" <Marvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7CA5523E-B6D7-4524-A3C2-DA30939B3F2B@.microsoft.com...
> > Thank you for clarifying...so here's my issue.
> > I installed a default instance of Report Services Std on a Non-Default
> > Website with Sql Server on a remote machine. I implemented custom
> > security.
> > No problems so far. I am able to log-in using Forms Auth and add a Folder.
> >
> > Then I would install a named instance on the same webserver. Without even
> > touching it after install (choosing to configure later), the DEFAULT
> > instance
> > returns a "Bad Request" error when trying to log in. I planned to set up
> > the
> > named instance on another Website.
> >
> > Any Ideas?
> >
> > "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> They need their own databases, not their own instance. RS 2005 should
> >> have
> >> no problem with this at all.
> >> From the article that Enrique provided a link to:"You can install
> >> multiple
> >> instances of Reporting Services on the same computer. Installing multiple
> >> instances is useful if you want to host different content for specific
> >> sites. Each instance will have its own report server database,
> >> configuration
> >> files, and virtual directories. "
> >>
> >> Note it says report server database NOT instance.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> >> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> >>
> >> "Marvin" <Marvin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:06567929-6302-4508-8B96-80D7A02B439E@.microsoft.com...
> >> > So am I understanding you correctly that each RS (standard ed) instance
> >> > will
> >> > need to have their own SQL Server Database Instance?
> >> >
> >> > Here is what my environment looks like:
> >> > WebServer has RSSite1(default) AND RSSite2(Named)
> >> > DatabaseServer has one Instance Of Sql Server called DBServ
> >> > DBServ has four databases:
> >> > RSSite1_ReportServer
> >> > RSSite1_ReportServerTempDb
> >> > RSSite2_ReportServer
> >> > RSSite2_ReportServerTempDb
> >> >
> >> > I'm doing this right now, but i'm running into some issues. Just want
> >> > to
> >> > know if this is supported so i can stop troubleshooting this.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >> > "EMartinez" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Aug 16, 7:45 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >> >> > i read through the documentatation, but its not clear to me if 2 RS
> >> >> > 05
> >> >> > standard ed on one machine can share the same database server but
> >> >> > separate
> >> >> > databases. Unless i'm misunderstading it... any ideas?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "EMartinez" wrote:
> >> >> > > On Aug 14, 12:58 pm, Marvin <Mar...@.discussions.microsoft.com>
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> > > > Can i have multiple Report Server 05 instances on one machine
> >> >> > > > conneting to
> >> >> > > > one remote Sql Database instance. Each Report Server will have
> >> >> > > > its
> >> >> > > > own
> >> >> > > > database in the SQL instance
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > This link should be helpful.
> >> >> > >http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms403426.aspx
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Regards,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Enrique Martinez
> >> >> > > Sr. Software Consultant
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> As far as I know, this should be fine as long as your virtual
> >> >> directories for Reports and ReportServer are physically separate for
> >> >> both SQL instances. Also, you will want to make sure that you have at
> >> >> least one default SQL Server Instance and one named SQL Server
> >> >> Instance local to SSRS. As long as your SQL Servers are not mixed
> >> >> (i.e., one SQL Server 2000 and one SQL Server 2005), it should be ok.
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >>
> >> >> Enrique Martinez
> >> >> Sr. Software Consultant
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>