SEE/SQL Database - Separate or Default Instance?
Updated: 22 May 2010 | 3 comments
I presently have SEP up and functional within my network. Preparing to start testing SEE v.7.03. On the face of it, SEP's db requirements are quite similar to the SEE db requirements, SQL db on the Mngt. server or with SQL db on a separate, backend SQL db server. However, SEP install documententation states the very best setup is creating a "separate instance" SQL db on SQL server. I see no specific recommendation toward's this, so far, in the SEE installation recommendations. I doubt I will create the db on the SEE mgr. server. More than likely I will install on a separate SQL server. With that in mind, what do you folks recommend; Separate or default instance? Will I see many benefits from a separate instance or will the default instance suffice? thanx
Discussion Filed Under:
Comments
it wouldn't hurt to have a
it wouldn't hurt to have a separate instance on the same SQL server. It's just a precaution to avoid any interruption in one instance affecting both systems.
Best regards,
Bekir Burak Durmaz
At this point I have a
At this point I have a separate SQL db server with a default instance that handles a number of individual databases and a separate instance for the SEP db, you are saying that it would be best to create a separate instance for the SEE db and not to include it within the SEP db (wasn't even thinking about that), but also not to include it within the default instance, just to keep all the traffic completely separate? thanx for your reply.
yes, 3 instances total.
yes, 3 instances total. sounds good to me :)
anytime...
Best regards,
Bekir Burak Durmaz
Would you like to reply?
Login or Register to post your comment.