April 30, 2010 at 3:36 pm
I would like to know if you can install a SQL Server database app on a network drive if SQL Server is not installed on the network' s server? This would be to upgrade an existing Access database's backend to SQL Server Express.
April 30, 2010 at 4:02 pm
No - SQL Server databases cannot be opened like an Access database. They are managed by the SQL Server Database Engine which runs on a server. The mdf/ldf files that make up the database must be attached to the database engine on that server - and accessed through SQL Server.
The mdf/ldf files also have to be located on local storage to the server instance running SQL Server.
For desktop based applications, you can use SQL Server 2005/2008 Express Edition installed on the local desktop - again, with the mdf/ldf files located on local storage to that system.
Jeffrey Williams
“We are all faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly disguised as impossible situations.”
― Charles R. Swindoll
How to post questions to get better answers faster
Managing Transaction Logs
April 30, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Thank you. So for example you could not have a setup disk with a visual basic program and a sql server database the way you can have a setup disk with a visual basic program and an Access database?
April 30, 2010 at 6:35 pm
Robert Crouser II (4/30/2010)
Thank you. So for example you could not have a setup disk with a visual basic program and a sql server database the way you can have a setup disk with a visual basic program and an Access database?
Not the same way - you could spawn out an install of SQL Server Express and set it up as a silent install. If you use a backup file, you could then restore the database to the right location and have a working SQL Server install and database.
But, no - it is not the same as using Access.
Jeffrey Williams
“We are all faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly disguised as impossible situations.”
― Charles R. Swindoll
How to post questions to get better answers faster
Managing Transaction Logs
April 30, 2010 at 6:46 pm
Backup because it doesn't copy, right? Do you think it would ever make any sense to do this?
April 30, 2010 at 6:54 pm
Backup/Restore because it is more consistent and safe. Copying the mdf/ldf file and attaching will work also, but if the mdf/ldf files were not detached properly - or just a simple read only bit is set on the files attaching would fail.
Besides, the backup file will be smaller and you only need a single file.
Jeffrey Williams
“We are all faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly disguised as impossible situations.”
― Charles R. Swindoll
How to post questions to get better answers faster
Managing Transaction Logs
April 30, 2010 at 6:55 pm
I thought sql server's reporting services would make this a good idea.
April 30, 2010 at 7:06 pm
Robert Crouser II (4/30/2010)
I thought sql server's reporting services would make this a good idea.
Sorry - I don't follow, what would reporting services do for you?
Jeffrey Williams
“We are all faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly disguised as impossible situations.”
― Charles R. Swindoll
How to post questions to get better answers faster
Managing Transaction Logs
April 30, 2010 at 8:38 pm
Develop reports. Doesn't SQL Server have a report developing feature? Visual Basic does not.
April 30, 2010 at 9:06 pm
Yes, but it does not come with the Express version by default. There is an express version (Advanced) that comes with it, but you have to be aware of the limitations. I don't know what they are, but I believe it's tied to a single instance of the database - I could be wrong.
For the paid versions, as long as it is installed on the same system as a licensed version of SQL Server it is also licensed. If you want a stand-alone reporting services system - you have to license it separately.
Jeffrey Williams
“We are all faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly disguised as impossible situations.”
― Charles R. Swindoll
How to post questions to get better answers faster
Managing Transaction Logs
April 30, 2010 at 11:07 pm
Thank you.
May 13, 2010 at 8:37 am
My experience with SQL Server reporting is not very good. I opted to use Crystal Reports. To me they are much easier to develop and manage.
May 14, 2010 at 8:26 am
bryan.duchesne (5/13/2010)
My experience with SQL Server reporting is not very good. I opted to use Crystal Reports. To me they are much easier to develop and manage.
I have to agree that Crystal is a more mature product and allows you to do some things that SSRS can't do. But for the price (FREE) SSRS is a great product. If cost is an issue then it's definitely the way to go.
In my organization we have two reporting initiatives one using SSRS the other using Crystal. The Crystal team is developing some fancy stuff from an eye candy perspective. But they can't deploy the reports across the enterprise because of the significant licensing costs involved. We don't have that issue with SSRS - so it is used for many of the everyday reports that hundreds of folks use for just the facts.
May 14, 2010 at 9:11 am
Which versions of SQL Server have the reporting service, which ones do not?
I've never heard of having to license a report you developed yourself.
May 14, 2010 at 9:33 am
SSRS is available for all editions of SQL, it's just that with the free Express version you may have to download some additional files to get add on features like SSRS. In the paid versions it is included.
See http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/editions-compare.aspx
The previous comment about additional licensing costs for a separate SSRS license would only apply if, say for scalability reasons, you needed a second instance of SSRS running on another server that is not a licensed SQL Server. In smaller installations, SSRS is typically run on the same box as the database and the license is included with the SQL Server product license.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 21 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply