upgrade sql server standard to enterprise

Question

upgrade sql server standard to enterprise

sqlfriend

SSC Guru

Points: 52776
More actions
July 27, 2011 at 10:54 am

#390066

Is there a documentation or instruction for upgrading sql server 2008 standard to enterprise?
Is it a risky process if we have critical database on the server?

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Ninja's_RGR'us SSC Guru Points: 294069 More actions · Answer 1

You answered your own question. If for any reason the upgrade fails then you lose your prod server which you seem to want to avoid like the plague.

If you have 2 servers live at the same time you always have more options ;-).

sqlfriend SSC Guru Points: 52776 More actions · Answer 2

So the best option may be do a side by side upgrade to a new server.

Even so I'm still interested if there is a documenation of upgrade in both cases.

Any ideas?

Thanks

Ninja's_RGR'us SSC Guru Points: 294069 More actions · Answer 3

Sounds like a good starting point.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb500442.aspx

thecodelifter SSC Enthusiast Points: 112 More actions · Answer 4

Is there a specific reason to go Enterprise? Like is this a 64bit or massive hardware improvement thing going on? Just curious.

sqlfriend SSC Guru Points: 52776 More actions · Answer 5

We found SQL server standard doesn't have two features we may need:

One is table partition, the other is backup compression.

I still need to evaluate the necessisty of doing this to balance between the risk on a critical database and to use those two new features.

Ninja's_RGR'us SSC Guru Points: 294069 More actions · Answer 6

You could also consider R2 standard (much cheaper) and comes with compressions. You'd still be without partition tho but the $ savings might be significant enough to go without it.

thecodelifter SSC Enthusiast Points: 112 More actions · Answer 7

Interesting. Well Backup Compression is supported in Standard R2, so you could just move to that. Better Admins than me should comment, but I think that path is probably a bit less drastic (and R2's good to have anyway). The Upgrade Advisor should give you a good clue at what you're looking at in that scenario.

Table Partitioning = ok, understood -- though while I think it's an incredibly useful design enhancement in 2008, you definitely have to do that assessment as to if it's worth it. I have had massive tables/databases w/o partitioning and no issue, but that depends too on

1. hardware specs

2. drive raid

3. good "design" to deal with performance.

4. what your definition of "big" is. I was at 150gb data/100gb index with no problems (denormalized). But if you'r in T-data sizes, that's a different story I'd think

thecodelifter SSC Enthusiast Points: 112 More actions · Answer 8

Ninja's_RGR'us (7/27/2011)
You could also consider R2 standard (much cheaper) and comes with compressions. You'd still be without partition tho but the $ savings might be significant enough to go without it.

Oh yeah -- and what he said too, b/c it is QUITE a jump in cost if you have a large # of servers or database farm to go to Enterprise.

Also factor in if you really have time/resources to use partitioning too. It's not like you can just hit a button and everything's refactored to partitions now 😛

Ninja's_RGR'us SSC Guru Points: 294069 More actions · Answer 9

Yup, you're talking about 21K more PER PROCESSOR, not cheap!

Good quick overview of the diffs between 2008 and R2.

http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2009/11/sql-server-2008-r2-pricing-and-feature-changes/