May 16, 2008 at 3:36 am
Hi,
Not sure if this is in the right place, but here goes.
We have decided to move up to SQL 2005..which is fine...looking forward to it.
However, after talks of a side by side upgrade, it has been decided, due to financial constraints...(yeah same old story) that we must do an inplace upgrade.
I've read another post on this site that suggested the inplace is very 'brittle' and that there are issues with service pack upgrades etc.
Can anyone tell me if this is still the case?
Has anyone done an inplace upgrade?
My plan was strip the servers back to just data, no indexes or keys, DTS, replication, FTIs or jobs. Upgrade essentially just the database engine with simple databases, and then build up the system from there.
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
Any comments would be gratefully received.
Many Thanks
Graeme
May 16, 2008 at 9:16 am
Another option to consider is installing SQL 2005 as a named instance on the same server and doing a side-by-side migration from SQL 2000. We've done this on our development server and it worked fine. Of course, it depends on having sufficient hardware, especially disk space, for two instances.
We're quite allergic to in-place upgrades because of the difficulty of falling back to the previous version.
Greg
May 16, 2008 at 9:30 am
The inplace upgrade is a one-way thing. There's no easy rollback. You can uninstall, reinstall 2000, attach dbs, etc., but it's slow. If you have time, and people understand this is the way things work if there's an issue, that's OK.
I'd be sure you have backups of the dbs (user and system) on another machine somewhere, marked as read-only, and keep them if you have issues.
I don't think you need to remove indexes, but I'd script out everything so you know what should be there, then rebuild or at least update stats once you're done.
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply