February 21, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Hi,
We are planning to upgrade sql server 2000 default instance to Sql server 2005 default instance using side -by -side upgrade method.
Our aim is to NOT to change the instance name.How can We achive this with side-by-side upgrade method?
Sql 2000:
ServerNAme: ABC
Instance: ABC(Default instance, which takes the server name right?)
Here I have one question.How can we keep the same default instance name in the new server(XYZ) with installation of sql server 2005?
and we are going for Active/Passive cluster for Sql server 2005.Here we choose a virtual server(xyzvs1) so how this effects inorder to keep the same default instance name as sql 2000?
The default installation takes the server name XYZ right?
From SQL 2005 UpgradeTechRef:
Change of Instance Type. If you perform an in-place upgrade, the instance type will remain the same. If you upgrade a default instance of SQL Server 2000 or 7.0, your result will be a default instance of SQL Server 2005. However, if you choose a side-by-side upgrade method onto two servers, or even on a single server, you may end up with different instance types
From above, I understand like the below:
We can not have a the same default instance name, if we go for side-by-side upgrade in a new server.Correct me if Iam wrong..
Please advice me, in which way we can keep the same default instane name as sql 2000(ABC) and same IP as sql 2000 in the New Failover cluster setup of sql server 2005?
Many thanks
February 22, 2009 at 4:14 am
so your sql2000 instance is currently clustered is it?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" 😉
February 22, 2009 at 10:15 am
NO, sql 2000 is NOT clustered. For the upgrade we are going for cluster.
February 22, 2009 at 10:28 am
for a standalone install the default instance name is the name of the server, for a cluster the SQL name you actually connect to is the virtual server name. within reason that can be whatever you want it to be, so I guess you could give the new virtuall instance the same name as your old SQL 2000 install.
However I would not recommend it, it would be confusing, and I would expect the old 2000 server would need to be powered down before the 2005 cluster was built (check on that with your wintel guys)
I would bite the bullet and go for a different name, its not usually difficult to point an app to a different server name. Investigate using DNS to repoint the app, thats quick to do and simple.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply