Install question

I installed SQL2005 (Standard Edition - 32 bit) for the 1st time and it
seemed to install fine. However, I wasn't prompted for licensing info (per
processor or per
seat) as SQL2000 does. Did I miss an option somewhere? The licensetype is
now disabled and numlicenses is now null.
Also unlike the SQL2000 install, I didn't see where you have the option to
put the database files (for master, msdb) should you not want them under
C:\program files.
Thanks for any help.
Ron
>I installed SQL2005 (Standard Edition - 32 bit) for the 1st time and it
> seemed to install fine. However, I wasn't prompted for licensing info
> (per
> processor or per
> seat) as SQL2000 does. Did I miss an option somewhere? The licensetype
> is
> now disabled and numlicenses is now null.
Sounds like you installed an MSDN version, in which case, licensing is
disabled. MSDN versions are for testing and development, and processor/CAL
licensing becomes irrelevant. You should not be running the MSDN version of
SQL Server on a machine where licensing is a concern.

> Also unlike the SQL2000 install, I didn't see where you have the option to
> put the database files (for master, msdb) should you not want them under
> C:\program files.
That option is there, it's just not front and center... it's in one of the
options tabs where you breakdown all of the installable features.
A
|||I really don't see any indication that it's an MSDN version. The CDs show:
On left hand size -
English
Microsoft SQL Server 2005
Standard Edition
(32 Bit)
(Disc 1 of 2)
On right hand size-
December 2005
Servers
Servers
Application
It also reads Microsoft Licensing in several places. No mention of MSDN.
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> Sounds like you installed an MSDN version, in which case, licensing is
> disabled. MSDN versions are for testing and development, and processor/CAL
> licensing becomes irrelevant. You should not be running the MSDN version of
> SQL Server on a machine where licensing is a concern.
>
> That option is there, it's just not front and center... it's in one of the
> options tabs where you breakdown all of the installable features.
> A
>
>
|||>I really don't see any indication that it's an MSDN version. The CDs show:
> On left hand size -
> English
> Microsoft SQL Server 2005
> Standard Edition
> (32 Bit)
> (Disc 1 of 2)
> On right hand size-
> December 2005
> Servers
> Servers
> Application
> It also reads Microsoft Licensing in several places. No mention of MSDN.
Does it say "Not for resale" or "Not for Retail" or "NFR" or "Not for OEM
Distribution" anywhere on the disc?
There are a few obscure cases where licensing becomes disabled, but 99% of
the time it's because it's an intentionall crippled edition.
A
|||Yes, it does show "Not for OEM or retail distribution" in the smaller print.
Should I be using another version?
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> Does it say "Not for resale" or "Not for Retail" or "NFR" or "Not for OEM
> Distribution" anywhere on the disc?
> There are a few obscure cases where licensing becomes disabled, but 99% of
> the time it's because it's an intentionall crippled edition.
> A
>
>
|||> Yes, it does show "Not for OEM or retail distribution" in the smaller
> print.
> Should I be using another version?
I am not sure what you are using it for, if you require licensing, what your
compliance status is, whether it's personal or company, etc. If you are
using this for production then yes you should have official licenses I am
sure.
|||I'm told we have Volume Licensing and the CDs were not MSDN. I uninstalled
sql2005 and downloaded the SQL2005 standard edition via the MVLS website. I
installed that version and still no prompt for licensing (asking for per
processor or per seat).
The licensetype is disabled and numlicenses is null.
As this will eventually be a production server so I'm concerned that all
will be well. Since I'm convinced we are properly licensed, should I be
concerned as to the values in the server property setting?
Thanks again.
Ron
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> I am not sure what you are using it for, if you require licensing, what your
> compliance status is, whether it's personal or company, etc. If you are
> using this for production then yes you should have official licenses I am
> sure.
>
>
|||SQL Server 2005 no longer tracks license information. The thinking at the
time this decision was made was that since license restrictions never were
enforced, eliminating the license information would reduce the number of
support calls generated when someone entered the wrong data or wanted to
switch license types. The license information columns weren't removed from
the system tables to keep from breaking applications that depend on them -
that's the normal deprecation policy - so they are still there but contain
no useful information. Now SQL works like most other MS server products -
the license is only a paper document that you need to have if you get
audited.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:734EF6A3-B060-452B-B505-6DBE4C601BA6@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm told we have Volume Licensing and the CDs were not MSDN. I
> uninstalled
> sql2005 and downloaded the SQL2005 standard edition via the MVLS website.
> I
> installed that version and still no prompt for licensing (asking for per
> processor or per seat).
> The licensetype is disabled and numlicenses is null.
> As this will eventually be a production server so I'm concerned that all
> will be well. Since I'm convinced we are properly licensed, should I be
> concerned as to the values in the server property setting?
> Thanks again.
> Ron
> "Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

Install question

I installed SQL2005 (Standard Edition - 32 bit) for the 1st time and it
seemed to install fine. However, I wasn't prompted for licensing info (per
processor or per
seat) as SQL2000 does. Did I miss an option somewhere? The licensetype is
now disabled and numlicenses is now null.
Also unlike the SQL2000 install, I didn't see where you have the option to
put the database files (for master, msdb) should you not want them under
C:\program files.
Thanks for any help.
Ron>I installed SQL2005 (Standard Edition - 32 bit) for the 1st time and it
> seemed to install fine. However, I wasn't prompted for licensing info
> (per
> processor or per
> seat) as SQL2000 does. Did I miss an option somewhere? The licensetype
> is
> now disabled and numlicenses is now null.
Sounds like you installed an MSDN version, in which case, licensing is
disabled. MSDN versions are for testing and development, and processor/CAL
licensing becomes irrelevant. You should not be running the MSDN version of
SQL Server on a machine where licensing is a concern.

> Also unlike the SQL2000 install, I didn't see where you have the option to
> put the database files (for master, msdb) should you not want them under
> C:\program files.
That option is there, it's just not front and center... it's in one of the
options tabs where you breakdown all of the installable features.
A|||I really don't see any indication that it's an MSDN version. The CDs show:
On left hand size -
English
Microsoft SQL Server 2005
Standard Edition
(32 Bit)
(Disc 1 of 2)
On right hand size-
December 2005
Servers
Servers
Application
It also reads Microsoft Licensing in several places. No mention of MSDN.
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> Sounds like you installed an MSDN version, in which case, licensing is
> disabled. MSDN versions are for testing and development, and processor/CA
L
> licensing becomes irrelevant. You should not be running the MSDN version
of
> SQL Server on a machine where licensing is a concern.
>
> That option is there, it's just not front and center... it's in one of the
> options tabs where you breakdown all of the installable features.
> A
>
>|||>I really don't see any indication that it's an MSDN version. The CDs show:
> On left hand size -
> English
> Microsoft SQL Server 2005
> Standard Edition
> (32 Bit)
> (Disc 1 of 2)
> On right hand size-
> December 2005
> Servers
> Servers
> Application
> It also reads Microsoft Licensing in several places. No mention of MSDN.
Does it say "Not for resale" or "Not for Retail" or "NFR" or "Not for OEM
Distribution" anywhere on the disc?
There are a few obscure cases where licensing becomes disabled, but 99% of
the time it's because it's an intentionall crippled edition.
A|||Yes, it does show "Not for OEM or retail distribution" in the smaller print.
Should I be using another version?
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> Does it say "Not for resale" or "Not for Retail" or "NFR" or "Not for OEM
> Distribution" anywhere on the disc?
> There are a few obscure cases where licensing becomes disabled, but 99% of
> the time it's because it's an intentionall crippled edition.
> A
>
>|||> Yes, it does show "Not for OEM or retail distribution" in the smaller
> print.
> Should I be using another version?
I am not sure what you are using it for, if you require licensing, what your
compliance status is, whether it's personal or company, etc. If you are
using this for production then yes you should have official licenses I am
sure.|||I'm told we have Volume Licensing and the CDs were not MSDN. I uninstalled
sql2005 and downloaded the SQL2005 standard edition via the MVLS website. I
installed that version and still no prompt for licensing (asking for per
processor or per seat).
The licensetype is disabled and numlicenses is null.
As this will eventually be a production server so I'm concerned that all
will be well. Since I'm convinced we are properly licensed, should I be
concerned as to the values in the server property setting?
Thanks again.
Ron
"Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> I am not sure what you are using it for, if you require licensing, what yo
ur
> compliance status is, whether it's personal or company, etc. If you are
> using this for production then yes you should have official licenses I am
> sure.
>
>|||SQL Server 2005 no longer tracks license information. The thinking at the
time this decision was made was that since license restrictions never were
enforced, eliminating the license information would reduce the number of
support calls generated when someone entered the wrong data or wanted to
switch license types. The license information columns weren't removed from
the system tables to keep from breaking applications that depend on them -
that's the normal deprecation policy - so they are still there but contain
no useful information. Now SQL works like most other MS server products -
the license is only a paper document that you need to have if you get
audited.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:734EF6A3-B060-452B-B505-6DBE4C601BA6@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm told we have Volume Licensing and the CDs were not MSDN. I
> uninstalled
> sql2005 and downloaded the SQL2005 standard edition via the MVLS website.
> I
> installed that version and still no prompt for licensing (asking for per
> processor or per seat).
> The licensetype is disabled and numlicenses is null.
> As this will eventually be a production server so I'm concerned that all
> will be well. Since I'm convinced we are properly licensed, should I be
> concerned as to the values in the server property setting?
> Thanks again.
> Ron
> "Aaron Bertrand [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:
>

Install of SQL/MSDE not completing HELP!

I am a new user working in Windows XP, and I already have the Web Matrix installed. I am trying to download and install MSDE but I am never prompted to restart my computer. When I do restart the PC symbol w/ the green arrow appears but when I click the data connection to establish a new database it comes with an error message:

Unable to connect to database server.

SQL Server does not exist or access denied.
Connection Open (Connect()).

I'm sure I'm entering the right user name (sa) and password. Please help!!

LaurenHi Lauren,

This is a common problem, and there are serveral reasons this can happen. Are you using Windows Authentication or Mixed (SQL Server and Windows) Authentication? What does your connection string look like?

Also, did you try searching for "access denied" in this forum? There are a lot of posts on this topic.

Terri

Install Error with Sept CTP

Hi all,
I am running into install error when prompted "PLEASE INSERT DISC
2" when I am installing with virtual drive using Daemon Tools instead of from
CD or DVD. I am a Universal MSDN Download Subscriber, but apparently MSDN don't support install issue with beta version of their product. I am stuck with not able to use this app, and any help is much appreciated.

Sincerely,
-Lawrence
Lawrence, A possible problem is that you didn't notice that some builds of Sept CTP come as two separate images - Server and Tools. I assume you downloaded Server only. Andrew Watt MVP - InfoPath wrote in message news:4aa66c60-7142-4d86-ba1c-77895be5c54d@.discussions.microsoft.com...
> Hi all,
> I am running into install error when prompted "PLEASE INSERT DISC
> 2" when I am installing with virtual drive using Daemon Tools instead of
> from
> CD or DVD. I am a Universal MSDN Download Subscriber, but apparently
> MSDN don't support install issue with beta version of their product. I
> am stuck with not able to use this app, and any help is much
> appreciated. >
> Sincerely,
> -Lawrence|||you need to download both .ISO files, servers and tools. Just load the tools .iso file in the same drive, and you should be fine.
|||To be clear, there are two files you need to download:

Disk1: en_SQL2005_DEV_Servers_Sept2005.iso
Disk2: en_SQL2005_DEV_Tools_Sept2005.iso

You need both of them.|||Great! I did not know Tools ISO would also be needed together with the Server ISO. Typically installation uses one ISO, and Server contains all necessary components. Was that mentioned in MSDN that Tools is also required? This has caused considerable confusion.

Thanks for your assistance!
-Lawrence