December 21, 2009 at 6:53 am
I have SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition (Windows Server 2003 R2) in my Production environment. Now, we are going to setup a DR for it but management wants to save money and have asked me to install SQL Server 2008 Enterprise Edition (Windows Server 2008 Enterprise Edition) in our new DR server. I am feeling that this will not be right as the versions are different. What is the point of a DR then if they are not the same. But I need to know more from the experts here who had done something similar in their environment. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
[font="Verdana"]Imagination is more important than knowledge-Albert Einstein[/font]
December 21, 2009 at 6:58 am
How are you using the DR Server?
December 21, 2009 at 7:04 am
The DR server will not be for application server. It will be used as Reporting server which has its own SQL instance with no interaction with Production server other than running a couple of jobs that execute SSIS packages to import records into a separate database on our production SQL2005 server. It will not be running unless we need to switch over to DR.
[font="Verdana"]Imagination is more important than knowledge-Albert Einstein[/font]
December 21, 2009 at 7:07 am
But how is it being used? How would you switch back?
You can restore a SQL Server 2005 backup to SQL Server 2008, but you can't go the other way.
December 21, 2009 at 7:09 am
Once upgraded to 2008 you cannot go back so if you have to failover to DR you will be on SQL 2008. If you have tested that you application works fully in 2008 this may work for you, personally I wouldn't be comfortable with having the 2 different environments for Production and DR. DR should ideally mirror production.
Can you upgrade your 2005 instance to 2008 to have them on the same platform?
December 21, 2009 at 7:16 am
Another suggestion to save money would be to use Mirroring for the DR server
If you can move the reporting database elsewhere, then if you use Mirroring you will not need to buy a second license for the Mirror and in the event of a fail-over you have 30 days to restore back to the principal before a license is neccesary.
December 21, 2009 at 7:27 am
Maybe I'm missing something here, but how on earth is using SQL 2008 Enterprise edition instead of SQL 2005 Standard Edition saving money? The licensing rules for the SQL 2005 and SQL 2008 are pretty similar, and if the server is being used for reporting, it needs licensing, and Enterprise edition is way, way more expensive than Standard Edition.
Lynn's right. Using is as the DR server isn't the problem. The problem is that, if you do switch to the DB server for any reason, you're going to have a very tough time switching back to the SQL 2005 server.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
December 21, 2009 at 9:01 am
Lynn, Carolyn, Steve and Gila......Thanks a million for your reponses.
The problem i have here is this one systems is not driven by the DBAs. There is a specific application team who decides, maintain and run the systems. I know, it is very tough and also weird. But when they need professional advise and solutions, they seek for the DBAs help. That's why I dont know their whole system. I had a very uncomfortable feeling about going to SQL Server 2008 with all the other applications are on SQL Server 2005. And yes, it is far more expensive to have 2008 ENTERPRISE Edition than Standard. But the term saving money was for not wasting any time and maintenance on 2005 then convert to 2008 later. They want the 2008 to be installed now itself to prevent another convertion. I think I have enough proof and support for my thoughts NOT to go to 2008 now and rather do it when everything else is in 2008. Once again,Thank you all for the responses.
[font="Verdana"]Imagination is more important than knowledge-Albert Einstein[/font]
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply