Moving Databases To A Different Box

[MDW]

Hey all,

One of the guys I work with is fanagling for us to get
another box for the Web site we work on. The plan is to
relocate all the databases (currently Access, but will
eventually be converted to SQL Server) to this new machine.

At present all the databases and ASP/HTML files reside on
the same machine - Windows 2000 Advances Server.

Two questions -

1) If we do this, does the box with the databases need to
have advanced server, or since it's only serving as a data
source, can we get away with just having Windows XP or
something?

2) Would a setup such as this increase security for the
data within the databases? If not, what other advantages
are there to this (assuming that disk space is not a
critical issue).

[Bob Barrows]

MDW wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> One of the guys I work with is fanagling for us to get
> another box for the Web site we work on. The plan is to
> relocate all the databases (currently Access, but will
> eventually be converted to SQL Server) to this new machine.
>

I would wait until you move to SQL Server to do this. Connecting to Access
databases on remote servers, while possible, has proven problematic for many
people. If you do this, make sure you carefully read this article:
[url]http://www.aspfaq.com/show.asp?id=2168[/url] along with the relevant KB articles
cited in the article.

> At present all the databases and ASP/HTML files reside on
> the same machine - Windows 2000 Advances Server.
>

It is definitely recommended that SQL Server and IIS be on different
machines.

> Two questions -
>
> 1) If we do this, does the box with the databases need to
> have advanced server,

No

> or since it's only serving as a data
> source, can we get away with just having Windows XP or
> something?
>

The current version of SQL Server (2000) will not install on XP, so the
other box should be W2000.

> 2) Would a setup such as this increase security for the
> data within the databases?

No.
Hopefully, you have your Access databases in folders that are outside the
wwwroot structure already.

> If not, what other advantages
> are there to this (assuming that disk space is not a
> critical issue).

For SQL Server to work most efficiently, it's got to have a pretty free rein
over system resources. This can take resources away from other applications
which need them (such as IIS). You can limit the amount of resources that
are taken by SQL Server, but that limits its performance. it is best to have
the servers on different boxes..

HTH,
Bob Barrows

--
Microsoft MVP - ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. This email account is my spam trap so I
don't check it very often. If you must reply off-line, then remove the
"NO SPAM"

[Aaron Bertrand [MVP]]

> > or since it's only serving as a data

> > source, can we get away with just having Windows XP or
> > something?
> >

>
> The current version of SQL Server (2000) will not install on XP, so the
> other box should be W2000.

Yep. Relevant articles:
[url]http://www.aspfaq.com/2202[/url]
[url]http://www.aspfaq.com/2494[/url]

--
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
[url]http://www.aspfaq.com/[/url]