Hi, thanks for your answer 🙂
Nadrek (8/16/2011)
The cleanest install is always starting with a fresh OS and working up from there. I like Windows Server 2008 R2, even as a host of SQL Server 2005.
Agreed, I would love to build a completely new server for this, but sadly the Application is only certified to run WinSvr2003 and SQL 2005. It would also mean re-installing the core application that also exists on that machine which is a painful process we want to avoid. I'm sorry I should have explained the project constraints a bit better in the original post. I have edited the OP to reflect that.
Maybe my question should be more specifically about different approaches to upgrades/installations on a given server. I see I have 3 reasonable options, from lowest risk to highest risk.
1. Upgrade/in place/over-write,
2. Parallel install, (then un-install SQL 2000?).
3. Uninstall 2000 -> install 2005.
Option 1: How good a job does SQL Server do when upgrading? Does it work but leave a mess behind? are SQL 2000 objects/files left intact, or obsolete services running or are they cleanly removed?
Option 2: Is this feasible? If I do a parallel install and then un-install 2000 components will it break anything? does anyone have any personal experience with this? Is it a cake walk or a nightmare?
Option 3: If I un-install SQL2000 but leave the .mdf files intact, and then install 2005... How will 2005 handle this? Will it re-use the master database and retain the server and database logins? Or will it overwrite and destroy it. In short, will option 3 even work?
Are there any other options I haven't considered? Am I being overly paranoid/pedantic?