Install of SQL 2005

If a server is going to be used for just SQL database access - locally on the
WAN - is there any need for IIS?
Does installing reporting services and IIS degrade the machine.
I've got a client whose DBA is debating these issues with the tech who
installed OS and SQL...
DBA wants bare-bones SQL install - thinking of installing IIS/Reporting
Services on another server later if it's ever needed.
Recommendations and opinions would be appreciated.Best practice would usually dictate that IIS / SSRS are employed on another
machine. However, just like whether you should buy an SL55 AMG or a Toyota
Corolla, it depends...
A
"Steve Z" <SteveZ@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9FF616F6-89A7-4B3C-B78E-566D976B25AF@.microsoft.com...
> If a server is going to be used for just SQL database access - locally on
> the
> WAN - is there any need for IIS?
> Does installing reporting services and IIS degrade the machine.
> I've got a client whose DBA is debating these issues with the tech who
> installed OS and SQL...
> DBA wants bare-bones SQL install - thinking of installing IIS/Reporting
> Services on another server later if it's ever needed.
> Recommendations and opinions would be appreciated.|||I agree. I would install bare essentials now, and add IIS/RS if/when needed.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" <ten.xoc@.dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:eOtb68zxHHA.4352@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Best practice would usually dictate that IIS / SSRS are employed on another machine. However,
> just like whether you should buy an SL55 AMG or a Toyota Corolla, it depends...
> A
>
>
> "Steve Z" <SteveZ@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9FF616F6-89A7-4B3C-B78E-566D976B25AF@.microsoft.com...
>> If a server is going to be used for just SQL database access - locally on the
>> WAN - is there any need for IIS?
>> Does installing reporting services and IIS degrade the machine.
>> I've got a client whose DBA is debating these issues with the tech who
>> installed OS and SQL...
>> DBA wants bare-bones SQL install - thinking of installing IIS/Reporting
>> Services on another server later if it's ever needed.
>> Recommendations and opinions would be appreciated.
>|||On Jul 15, 4:30 pm, Steve Z <Ste...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> If a server is going to be used for just SQL database access - locally on the
> WAN - is there any need for IIS?
> Does installing reporting services and IIS degrade the machine.
> I've got a client whose DBA is debating these issues with the tech who
> installed OS and SQL...
> DBA wants bare-bones SQL install - thinking of installing IIS/Reporting
> Services on another server later if it's ever needed.
> Recommendations and opinions would be appreciated.
As already echoed in the thread, start with your minimal footprint and
add as necessary. Reporting Services is pretty easy to get up and
running when need be. Just get your specifications and go from there.|||Is there a reason to use a named instance?
Is there a reason to not use a named instance?
This will be a large enterprise server - over 1000 users - around 20 or so
buildings across town.
Opinions?|||No and no. A named instance isn't different from a default instance except for how you access it
from a client (like only machinename or machinename\instancename). So do what feels natural for you.
Well, the one difference I can think of is resolution from machine (or host) name to port number,
when using the IP netlib.
For the default instance, the port is well known (1433). You can change this but that requires that
you specify that port in the client app.
For a named instance, the client queries the "SQL Server browser" service which relies what port
number the desired instance is using. This is done using port 1434, UDP.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/tibor_karaszi
"Steve Z" <SteveZ@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9A6F1BE0-5819-457A-8E07-86869FDF2BE7@.microsoft.com...
> Is there a reason to use a named instance?
> Is there a reason to not use a named instance?
> This will be a large enterprise server - over 1000 users - around 20 or so
> buildings across town.
> Opinions?