1. I'm not sure what is actually happening...
I can't seem toall of the instances are on the same physical machine, right? What do you> access the historic database from SQL Query yser on the default
mean when you say that you can't access the historic database from the
default instance? You don't run QA from an instance... you run it from a
physical Windows server (or PC...).
I'm not 100% sure what the problem is from that message...
if you're talking about DB's that have just a few thousand records... you
absolutely don't need to worry about archiving your data for performance
purposes. Just creates a lot of admin/dev overhead you don't need to worry
Also.. in general... you'll probably get much better performance with one
instance that has multiple DB's rather than 6 instances. That will waste a
lot of memory and disk space....
Solid Quality Learning
SQL Server MVP
"Ian Henderson" <ihendersonessentiagroup.com> wrote in message
news:bejoqa$8dc$1$8300dec7news.demon.co.uk...handle> We have just created 6 new instances of SQL Server 2000, each one tovia> specific functions.
> The problem that I have got at the moment is this:
> We run a database which handles approximately 5000 records (as well as
> umpteen related-records) each day. In order to stop that database from
> becoming too big, we've also created a historic database, which the "live"
> system dumps into each day, just after midnight. That "dump" is handledexecuted,> a stored procedure which is called by the live system.
> The historic system has been placed into one of the new instances, which
> isn't a problem. What is a problem is the fact that now, I can't seem to
> access the historic database from SQL Query yser on the default
> instance, which presumably means that when the stored procedure is> it'll fail because it can't see the historic database.
> Is there something I can set up which reduces the amount of recoding
> required? I really hope so.
> Ian Henderson
> Database Developer
> The Essentiagroup (ihendersonessentiagroup.com)