convert 180-day version of sql

I need to find out what steps to take to convert the 180-day version of sql server 2005. My server has Microsoft Small Business Server 2003 Premium installed.What do you want to install instead ? Make sure you have the correct licences in place.

Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de
|||

If you have the correct licensing and are looking for the technical answer, the trick is to use the SKUUPGRADE=1 flag during upgrade. Take a look at template.ini or Books Online for more info. Here is a forums snippet that I can't seem to find on MSDN at the moment, but it should get you started.

If you have already expired with your existing version, take a look at this article:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914158/en-us

Thanks,
Sam Lester (MSFT)

[SKUUPGRADE]

Use the SKUUPGRADE parameter when upgrading from one edition of SQL Server 2005 to another edition of SQL Server 2005.

Important:

If you use the SKUUPGRADE parameter, Setup will remove all hotfix and service pack updates from the SQL Server instance being upgraded. Once the edition upgrade is complete, you must reapply all hotfix and service pack updates.

To perform an edition upgrade of a default instance of SQL Server 2005 (SQL Engine only) via unattended Setup, run the following command using either /qb or /qn:

start /wait setup.exe ADDLOCAL=SQL_Engine INSTANCENAME=MSSQLSERVER UPGRADE=SQL_Engine SKUUPGRADE=1 /qb

Conversion of Oracle Version 0-1 from DEC Machine

Hi... Have a customer who's running version 1 of oracle on a DEC
machine.. is there a driver out there for that stuff? How might one
get the data from the DEC machine to Sql Server 2000?? All I have
now are fdl/sfl files.

thanks in advance.

SteveSteve Walker wrote:
> Hi... Have a customer who's running version 1 of oracle on a DEC
> machine.. is there a driver out there for that stuff? How might one
> get the data from the DEC machine to Sql Server 2000?? All I have
> now are fdl/sfl files.
> thanks in advance.
> Steve

It is extremely unlikely that your customer has version 1 of Oracle
considering Oracle customer list at that point. Find out what they
really have and how they determined it.

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan@.x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)|||Hi

If there is an ODBC driver you may be able to connect.

John
"Steve Walker" <swalker@.ainet.com> wrote in message
news:bde87b71.0410221056.b2368dc@.posting.google.co m...
> Hi... Have a customer who's running version 1 of oracle on a DEC
> machine.. is there a driver out there for that stuff? How might one
> get the data from the DEC machine to Sql Server 2000?? All I have
> now are fdl/sfl files.
> thanks in advance.
> Stevesqlsql

Converfting a 2000 db to 2005.

I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored it
restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to 2005 do
I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
TIA - Jeff.
It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs are
kept in 80 (2000) computability mode by default. Just change it to 9.0 and
you are all set.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored it
>restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to 2005 do
>I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
> Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
> TIA - Jeff.
>

Converfting a 2000 db to 2005.

I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored it
restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to 2005 do
I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
TIA - Jeff.It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs are
kept in 80 (2000) computability mode by default. Just change it to 9.0 and
you are all set.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored it
>restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to 2005 do
>I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
> Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
> TIA - Jeff.
>|||OK. I guess the question then becomes why would I want to leave it in 80
compatibility mode?
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23lAH6SicHHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs are
> kept in 80 (2000) computability mode by default. Just change it to 9.0 and
> you are all set.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored it
>>restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to 2005
>>do I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
>> Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
>> TIA - Jeff.
>>
>|||Perhaps you app hasn't been fully converted to support 90 level yet.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message news:OhJYFOjcHHA.1000@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> OK. I guess the question then becomes why would I want to leave it in 80 compatibility mode?
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23lAH6SicHHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs are kept in 80 (2000)
>> computability mode by default. Just change it to 9.0 and you are all set.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored it restored as a version
>>80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to 2005 do I just go into options and change the
>>compatibility to 90?
>> Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
>> TIA - Jeff.
>>
>>
>|||Aahh. OK. Thanks.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OA06fRjcHHA.5044@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Perhaps you app hasn't been fully converted to support 90 level yet.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:OhJYFOjcHHA.1000@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> OK. I guess the question then becomes why would I want to leave it in 80
>> compatibility mode?
>> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23lAH6SicHHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs
>> are kept in 80 (2000) computability mode by default. Just change it to
>> 9.0 and you are all set.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored
>>it restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to
>>2005 do I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
>> Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
>> TIA - Jeff.
>>
>>
>>
>|||"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23wvvy0jcHHA.2332@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Aahh. OK. Thanks.
Note, that things like the query optimizer will be "updated" either way and
this can have adverse consequences in a few degenerate cases.
But overall you probably want to QA your DB under 2005 and change the
compatibility to it as soon as you can.
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:OA06fRjcHHA.5044@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Perhaps you app hasn't been fully converted to support 90 level yet.
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:OhJYFOjcHHA.1000@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> OK. I guess the question then becomes why would I want to leave it in 80
>> compatibility mode?
>> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23lAH6SicHHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs
>> are kept in 80 (2000) computability mode by default. Just change it to
>> 9.0 and you are all set.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored
>>it restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to
>>2005 do I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
>> Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
>> TIA - Jeff.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html|||Hello,
Can you install the Upgrade Advisor and excute the advisor for your SQL 2000
database. Based on the advise you could do nessary chages to make the
database fully
compatibel to SQL 2005.
Thanks
Hari
"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23wvvy0jcHHA.2332@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Aahh. OK. Thanks.
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:OA06fRjcHHA.5044@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Perhaps you app hasn't been fully converted to support 90 level yet.
>> --
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:OhJYFOjcHHA.1000@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> OK. I guess the question then becomes why would I want to leave it in 80
>> compatibility mode?
>> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23lAH6SicHHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs
>> are kept in 80 (2000) computability mode by default. Just change it to
>> 9.0 and you are all set.
>> --
>> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored
>>it restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to
>>2005 do I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
>> Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
>> TIA - Jeff.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Converfting a 2000 db to 2005.

I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored it
restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to 2005 do
I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
TIA - Jeff.It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs are
kept in 80 (2000) computability mode by default. Just change it to 9.0 and
you are all set.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I have a 2000 db that I've restored to a 2005 machine. When it restored it
>restored as a version 80 db (2000 I would assume). To convert it to 2005 do
>I just go into options and change the compatibility to 90?
> Will it tell me if there are things that can't be converted?
> TIA - Jeff.
>|||OK. I guess the question then becomes why would I want to leave it in 80
compatibility mode?
"Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
news:%23lAH6SicHHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> It actually upgraded it to 2005 when you restored it. But upgraded dbs are
> kept in 80 (2000) computability mode by default. Just change it to 9.0 and
> you are all set.
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:ObOhzGicHHA.588@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>|||Perhaps you app hasn't been fully converted to support 90 level yet.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message news:OhJYFOjcHHA.1000@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...[vbc
ol=seagreen]
> OK. I guess the question then becomes why would I want to leave it in 80 c
ompatibility mode?
> "Andrew J. Kelly" <sqlmvpnooospam@.shadhawk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23lAH6SicHHA.3616@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>[/vbcol]|||Aahh. OK. Thanks.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OA06fRjcHHA.5044@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Perhaps you app hasn't been fully converted to support 90 level yet.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:OhJYFOjcHHA.1000@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>|||"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23wvvy0jcHHA.2332@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Aahh. OK. Thanks.
Note, that things like the query optimizer will be "updated" either way and
this can have adverse consequences in a few degenerate cases.
But overall you probably want to QA your DB under 2005 and change the
compatibility to it as soon as you can.

> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:OA06fRjcHHA.5044@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html|||Hello,
Can you install the Upgrade Advisor and excute the advisor for your SQL 2000
database. Based on the advise you could do nessary chages to make the
database fully
compatibel to SQL 2005.
Thanks
Hari
"Mufasa" <jb@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23wvvy0jcHHA.2332@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Aahh. OK. Thanks.
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:OA06fRjcHHA.5044@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>sqlsql

Continued DTS support with what SQL Server Version/Edition

We currently have access to another department's SQL server. However they are taking that server offline within a few months, and we will need to migrate our data and DTS packages to a new solution before then. We have about 30 databases and 20 somewhat simple DTS packages, but only a few users need access. Funding is very tight.

SQL 2005's support of DTS is somewhat of a mystery to me. Docs state with 2000 Enterprise client tools installed + Express edition, that I can run DTS packages on Express edition. But the docs do not state the procedure for doing so, and I cannot register the Express server in the Enterprise manager(states must be using 2005 version of Enterprise manager). It seems I can Design a DTS package that resides on the 2000 server and specify a connection to the Express server, but the DTS package would not run, stating always that the table was in use, and I haven't explored it any further. May have just been a quirk.

I'm trying to conquer this in two pieces:

Cheapest solution for graphical design of DTS packages, or some techniology similar(I think I understand that this is called SSIS in 2005?). This would be needed by 1-4 users.

SQL 2005 Developer Edition for each user, only about $50 per user.

MSDE for each user, but can this house DTS packages and be connected to by enterprise manager?

Cheapest solution for data access and ability to run DTS packages by 2-10 users.

If SQL Express Edition is used to house data, can the DTS packages be distributed in some way that allows the users to run them? I.E. exported as VB code or some sort of file that can be loaded by an Access 2002 or VB.NET frontend.

Can all users have Developer Edition or Desktop edition and run the DTS package from it, but have the DTS package connect to the Express Edition server where the data is housed? Or would this be a violation of what the Developer Edition is intended to be used for?

Any other suggested scenarios are welcome.

Are we allowed to continue using the 2000 Enterprise manager after we no longer have access to a licensed SQL 2000 Enterprise server?

The feature comparison for the different 2005 editions doesn't mention DTS, but I know it works for some editions if the add on components are installed. I'm just not sure which versions support this.

1. For development, SQL 2005 dev edition includes sql server 2005 database engine. No msde is required. The server will persist DTS 2000 packages. You cannot connect via 2000 tools, but you can via included 2005 tools. For editing DTS 2000 packages, you need the DTS Designer download, located on msdn as part of the sql 2005 feature pack.

2. The DTS 2000 object model is free. It can be redistributed from the 2000 install disk, or is also available as part of the backward compatibility redist in the feature pack. Once installed on a machine, DTS packages may be run from the command line or from the agent, loading packages resident on 2000 or 2005 servers, or on the file system.

You don't have a need for 2000 enterprise manager here, as your 2005 dev edition will suffice for development work. Howvever, if you want to save your production packages on sql server you will need to attend to licensing for that server. I think msde or express will work, but am not sure. As an alternative, you can save your packages on the file system. There they can be edited by 2000 or 2005 tools.