Coffeehouse Thread

24 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

VS2005 SQL Server 2005 Install Order?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    irascian

    Which are you installing first?

    I seem to remember when installing the beta's that the "natural" install order (database first and then Visual Studio) caused some problems with missing programs and that I had to install Visual Studio first which gave me SQL Server Express and then the database afterwards to get the SQL Server Studio (aka Enterprise Manager replacement).

    Can anyone confirm this is the right order or that it doesn't actually matter?

    I'm assuming Visio for Ent Architects goes on last. That whole area is a minefield.  There used to be a problem with previous editions where you were missing templates if you didn't install Visio Pro 2002 edition before attempting Ent Architect edition (which was also 2002).  But after Visio 2003 installing Ent Architect just seems to screw up any way of applying service packs to Ent Architect 2002 (they'd always fail).

    Thanks.

    Ian
    P.S. Glad I waited a few hours - after endless rejections I waited a couple of hours to find DVD ISOs now listed and download speeds are pretty good)

  • User profile image
    nosajis

    My download speeds are very good.  I am very happy with them.  I am also very interested in the question you asked about order.

    Visual Studio 2005
    SQL Server Developer Edition 2005
    Visio Ent Arch 2005

    I think you're dead on, it is all about the order, and I'm afraid to install them without some guidance as to "What's best"

    What a sissy huh?

    Oh well.

  • User profile image
    flyingdeath

    VS First then SQL. I think this is the correct order...Cool

  • User profile image
    GarySeven

    My last install: VS2005 RC, SQL Server 2005 Dev. Sept CTP

    Order:

    1. VS2005 RC including SQL Server Express

    2. SQL Server Dev. Sept CTP

    That worked fine no problems. Then a couple of Days later:

    3. SQL Server Dev. Tools Sept CTP

    I wanted to use the new SQL Server Management Studio which also works with SQL Server 2000 and SQL Server Express databases.

    Can't speak to Visio as I use Enterprise Architect from Sparx for my UML and database diagrams.

    As soon as my bits download I'll install the new stuff.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    I've got a server to install SQL Server and IIS onto, therefore I don't need to worry about this Smiley

    BTW, how hard is it for VS2005 to behave like VS2003 for "Development Server" use?

    I noticed VS2005 uses that "ASP.NET Testing Server" on localhost and stuff, is it possible /not/ to install that?

  • User profile image
    Tommy Lee

    I like the concept of the developer server.  Most folks usually install the framework bits along with the Framework SDK.  What are the types of things you would look to do on a developer server? 

    Assumption is that you wouldn't do a install of Visual Studio, but maybe parts of it (such as the MSBuild tools) without the dev environment UI.

    I would be interested in your thoughts.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Tommy Lee wrote:
    I like the concept of the developer server.  Most folks usually install the framework bits along with the Framework SDK.  What are the types of things you would look to do on a developer server? 

    Assumption is that you wouldn't do a install of Visual Studio, but maybe parts of it (such as the MSBuild tools) without the dev environment UI.

    I would be interested in your thoughts.


    I just built a cheap AMD Sempron box for £150, jammed Windows Server 2003 onto it, decided to make a Domain for my house whilst I was at it.

    The thing runs Exchange, SQL Server, IIS, Active Directory, Terminal Services... all on 512MB ram.

    ...Totally breaking the rules of NOT putting Exchange and SQL Server on the same box (its fun watching them fight for RAM). But the box runs and has a good uptime of over 100 days, I'm not complaining.

    As for installation....

    I usually install IIS, then SQL Server, then Visual Studio (the full thing, including Remote Debugging tools, but also the full IDE so I can work over Terminal Services).

    No complaints yet, although Native Remote Code debugging over the network is REALLY laggy... like 300ms wait for the "yellow line" to move after hitting "Step Into"

  • User profile image
    PerfectPhase

    W3bbo wrote:

    I noticed VS2005 uses that "ASP.NET Testing Server" on localhost and stuff, is it possible /not/ to install that?


    It's just a project option to change it back to using IIS if installed.

    Stephen

  • User profile image
    ben2004uk

    Whats the spec of that machine??

    I just brought a new machine, but i dont know if ineed yet another one for a 2003 box (i live away from home, so i have two PCs + laptop) at home, and one where i live atm (oh plus an ibook).)

    Also rent a web server online, only had it a week and not even logged into it Crying  too busy, going to installl Sql Server 2005 Express (no license costs, will do for a time being i hope, only used the full beta) once its up for downloading.

    How many machines is too many??

     

    W3bbo wrote:


    I just built a cheap AMD Sempron box for £150, jammed Windows Server 2003 onto it, decided to make a Domain for my house whilst I was at it.

    The thing runs Exchange, SQL Server, IIS, Active Directory, Terminal Services... all on 512MB ram.

    ...Totally breaking the rules of NOT putting Exchange and SQL Server on the same box (its fun watching them fight for RAM). But the box runs and has a good uptime of over 100 days, I'm not complaining.

    As for installation....

    I usually install IIS, then SQL Server, then Visual Studio (the full thing, including Remote Debugging tools, but also the full IDE so I can work over Terminal Services).

    No complaints yet, although Native Remote Code debugging over the network is REALLY laggy... like 300ms wait for the "yellow line" to move after hitting "Step Into"

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    ben2004uk wrote:
    Whats the spec of that machine??


    AMD Sempron 2300+
    512MB RAM (480 in reality, the onboard video takes 32MB out from the RAM)
    £10 case from eBuyer


    Originally it only had 256MB ultra-cheap "Tesco Value" RAM, but after I upgraded my main PC to a gig, I moved the 512 back into that.

    ben2004uk wrote:

    I just brought a new machine, but i dont know if ineed yet another one for a 2003 box (i live away from home, so i have two PCs + laptop) at home, and one where i live atm (oh plus an ibook).)

    Also rent a web server online, only had it a week and not even logged into it   too busy, going to installl Sql Server 2005 Express (no license costs, will do for a time being i hope, only used the full beta) once its up for downloading.

    I did think about using my web-hosting server as a development box, but then I remebered that you don't get .NET Remote Debugging and a whole load of other things, so I decided against it.

    Before I used to use my Pentium 166 box running PWS to test my ASP scripts though.

    As for a dedicated server, don't bother, the lag is too much, you'd be too frustrated by the extra 200ms trip time for the debugging packets than the frustration the bug actually causes.

    ben2004uk wrote:
    How many machines is too many?

    I reckon the average "super developer" shouldn't need more than 5 boxes:

    • Primary development box
    • Development testing box
    • Domain Controller box
    • Testing computer 1
    • Testing computer 2


  • User profile image
    ben2004uk

    "

    I reckon the average "super developer" shouldn't need more than 5 boxes:

    • Primary development box
    • Development testing box
    • Domain Controller box
    • Testing computer 1
    • Testing computer 2

    "

    But with VMWare you only really need a PDB (Primary Dev Box) and a domain controler with 4-5 images on there (don't really all need to be running, as an extra pc or two does not relate to stress testing, just concurrent).

    At home I have a linux box running Duron 1.1, 512mb, 40Gb, dual ethernet,  was thinking of maybe bring that to where i live, bring my kvm with it and using it was a another box running 2003.

    If I get another 512mb for £20 or something off ebay then i'm sure I can get a virtual XP Pro on there aswell (with no effects)

  • User profile image
    GarySeven

    Just to confirm, here's what I installed and the order I installed them last night:

    1. Visual Studio 2005 with SQL Server Express

    2. SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition

    Everything's working fine, so that must be the correct order. The ReadMe for SQL Server 2005 Dev says that the installer doesn't include the .NET 2.0 framework.
     
    I did run into one problem with my uninstall of the SQL Server 2005 Dev Sept. CTP which couldn't uninstall the "Microsoft SQL Server Tools CTP [9.00.1314.06]". This caused my SQL Server Express not to install. I finally got rid of the server tools by using the Windows Installer Cleanup tool and successfully installed Express edition.

    I think I probably screwed up the uninstall order of the SQL Server 2005 Dev bits. If anyone's going to uninstall SQL Server 2005 Dev, use the "Microsft SQL Server 2005" entry in the Add or Remove Programs applet. After you uninstall the database instance you can remove the other components from there afterwards. I didn't see it at first.

    Coding James!

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    Funny, for all the betas and CTPs I always put SQL on first.

    But then, rebel that I am, I haven't downloaded the release versions.

    Buhahahahahahaha!

  • User profile image
    BlackTigerX

    all done
    downloaded
    burnt
    installed

    the installation went very smooth, in about 40 minutes, altough I'm not sure if I had to install SQL 2005 Disk 2, since when I finished installing SQL 2005 Disk 1 it didn't ask for Disk 2, but I did any way

    any comments on that?

    I installed Visual Studio 2005 Team Edition first, then SQL 2005

    ready to play[H]

  • User profile image
    GarySeven

    [quote user="BlackTigerX"]the installation went very smooth, in about 40 minutes, altough I'm not sure if I had to install SQL 2005 Disk 2, since when I finished installing SQL 2005 Disk 1 it didn't ask for Disk 2, but I did any way

    any comments on that?
    quote]

    Disk 2 contains the tools and books. SQL Server 2005 doesn't require it but if you want the new Management Studio you'll need to install it.

  • User profile image
    Steve411

    I installed VS 05 first because i couldnt wait to use it. I have no need to upgrade my local SQL 00' to 05' since it's not going to be used in the final deployment environment.

    - Steve

  • User profile image
    dotnetjunkie

    GarySeven wrote:

    1. Visual Studio 2005 with SQL Server Express

    2. SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition



    Why did you install SQL Express if you were going to put the developer edition on it afterwards?

    I used the same install order, but cleared the box in front of Sql Server Express in the VS2005 installer.

    Are there any disadvantages of not havind sql express if you install the full dev edition?

  • User profile image
    An_Angel

    My colleague stood over me at the moment is asking for your help.  He has installed the latest and greatest VS05 followed by SQL05 and he doesn't seem to have the management studio (enterprise manager thingy)

    Any clue as to what would cause this to not install?  He completely uninstalled everything using the uninstall tool and there were no errors when he did this... I would have expected a clean install after that!

    Any hints, tips or advice would be greatly appreciated.

    Sarah

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.