Re: In place upgrade.. side by side.. or brand new install ontop of 2003 SMS?

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

markm75 wrote:
On Oct 27, 10:36 am, "Kim Oppalfens [MVP]" <""Kim dot Oppalfens
\"@google mail.com"> wrote:
markm75 wrote:
We are a small organization.. 40 users.. 5 servers.. we use SMS 2003,
mainly for distribution of software and remote assistance..
I have created a good 40 or 50 software packages.. which are really
just pointers to the msi files stored on our file server (same
server).. and all the advertisements and system collections that go
with each one..
Obviously, i'm guessing if I do a brand new install.. i'd loose all
these advertisements? I'm guessing the upgrade would keep them, but
would i lose advanced features of system center config manager? Or
what about the side by side upgrade with them being migrated?
Finally.. I was considering installing sql 2005 on a different server
than the main program.. along with the instances for operations
manager, dpm and virtual server manager.. is this ok to do (its a 4gb
memory xeon (no dual core) 2.8ghz machine, with sql 2000 (3 instances)
currently, using about 2gb of memory?
Thanks in advance.
For this small a setup I would probably go for an inplace upgrade which
will indeed maintain all you packages, advertisements etc...

I answered running all these databases on one box in your different
post, but I didn't know the environment was pretty small when I answered.

To me, this seems like a setup that should work, given the low number of
clients and servers.

--
"Everyone is an expert at something"
Kim Oppalfens - Sms Expert for lack of any other expertise
Windows Server System MVP - SMShttp://www.blogcastrepository.com/blogs/kim_oppalfenss_systems_manage...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I dont lose any advanced features by just doing the inplace upgrade do
i?

As far as what you mentioned before regarding placing the sql
databases all on the same box.. even though we are small.. i think
that i will seperate the config database from the operations one..

One i didnt mention, that i have on a server dedicated to just
backups.. is DPM 2007.. I'm thinking perhaps i should just leave that
SQL db on that same server.. perhaps to enhance backup speeds or maybe
the database on a remote server is no factor.


One other question.. i've heard some people mention virtualizing
config, operations and virtual manager.. i'm pretty sure their sql db
was on a physical host though, but i wasnt sure if they put all 3 in
one virtual server 2005 machine or not? And if they did.. how much
memory would you need to allocate for just those 3 on one box (1gb
virtual memory?). As of now the only machine that could handle
virtual machines well, would be the backup server, which is a dual
core, dual cpu, 2.0ghz, 4gb memory machine, with raid5 sata II
drives..


Nope you don't lose any functionality that I can think of.

Separating them on a different box definitely wouldn't hurt.

They can sure be virtualized but all on one box might be a bit much, You could start by virtualizing just 2 and see how that goes.

--
"Everyone is an expert at something"
Kim Oppalfens - Sms Expert for lack of any other expertise
Windows Server System MVP - SMS
http://www.blogcastrepository.com/blogs/kim_oppalfenss_systems_management_ideas/default.aspx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Advantages and disadvantages of multiple instances on a cluste
    ... databases +all SharePoint dabases. ... On a production server - I can't come up with a good reason to use named ... my company's existing 2-node active/passive SQL Server 2005 cluster. ... I figure memory management could be more ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: Looking for advice on when to create additional instances
    ... Multiple Instances are multiple copies of SQL Server running on the same box, each with their own memory needs, sharing the processors, and so forth. ... You can manage some of this by limited the memory use of each instance, use processor affinity to divide up the processors between instances, and so forth. ... Adding an instance just to add new databases simply puts more overhead on the server. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.server)
  • Re: Virtualizing Terminal Server 2003
    ... bit physical vs multiple 32 bit physicals it's not so simple, ... Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server ... are benefits to virtualizing so it's a matter of what's important. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services)
  • Re: Out of Memory When using COM Objects
    ... If you are finding your IIS server crashing out of the blue and are ... your Access Databases if the sites that are going off line without notice. ... Be very sure that you Compact all of the Databases ... > cause the server to go out of memory. ...
    (microsoft.public.inetserver.iis)
  • Re: Database count support in Analysis Services 2005
    ... but you can install more then 1 instance like you can do with SQL Server. ... AS2000 load dimensions into memory when you starts the service, ... AS2005 keep in cache the calculation results, while in AS2000 the cache is ... but I have not tested a so large number of databases, so I don't know how AS ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.olap)