![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Is this how it supposed to be? Yes. |
|
Hello, I just run a test upgrade on SQL 2000 ENT (SP4) to SQL 2005 ENT. I took the default instance (in place upgrade?). The installation completes successfully. I noticed there still exists the SQL Enterprise manager from the SQL 2000 version. The databases are visible on the Enterprise Manager 2000 and the new SQL Server Management Studio. I did a test by bringing a database offline/online and it seems the action taken on the Enterprise manager (2000) or Studio Manager (2005) will reflect the change by the other. Is this how it supposed to be? I did download the technical reference but thought I run through this site first. TIA, tnt |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
Is this how it supposed to be? Yes. "tnt" <tnt (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:ACA04EEE-A269-4FB2-AA82-56C3DD9B5EC9 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... Hello, I just run a test upgrade on SQL 2000 ENT (SP4) to SQL 2005 ENT. I took the default instance (in place upgrade?). The installation completes successfully. I noticed there still exists the SQL Enterprise manager from the SQL 2000 version. The databases are visible on the Enterprise Manager 2000 and the new SQL Server Management Studio. I did a test by bringing a database offline/online and it seems the action taken on the Enterprise manager (2000) or Studio Manager (2005) will reflect the change by the other. Is this how it supposed to be? I did download the technical reference but thought I run through this site first. TIA, tnt |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
I also noticed tonight when I created a new database at either console, the changes also reflected on other console. Thank you for your reply. Tnt "Knappan" wrote: Is this how it supposed to be? Yes. "tnt" <tnt (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:ACA04EEE-A269-4FB2-AA82-56C3DD9B5EC9 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... Hello, I just run a test upgrade on SQL 2000 ENT (SP4) to SQL 2005 ENT. I took the default instance (in place upgrade?). The installation completes successfully. I noticed there still exists the SQL Enterprise manager from the SQL 2000 version. The databases are visible on the Enterprise Manager 2000 and the new SQL Server Management Studio. I did a test by bringing a database offline/online and it seems the action taken on the Enterprise manager (2000) or Studio Manager (2005) will reflect the change by the other. Is this how it supposed to be? I did download the technical reference but thought I run through this site first. TIA, tnt |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
The sql server management studio version is 8.00.2039 with SELECT @@Version command. It has the same version from the Enterprise Manager. Now I am confused. Tnt "tnt" wrote: I also noticed tonight when I created a new database at either console, the changes also reflected on other console. Thank you for your reply. Tnt "Knappan" wrote: Is this how it supposed to be? Yes. "tnt" <tnt (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:ACA04EEE-A269-4FB2-AA82-56C3DD9B5EC9 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... Hello, I just run a test upgrade on SQL 2000 ENT (SP4) to SQL 2005 ENT. I took the default instance (in place upgrade?). The installation completes successfully. I noticed there still exists the SQL Enterprise manager from the SQL 2000 version. The databases are visible on the Enterprise Manager 2000 and the new SQL Server Management Studio. I did a test by bringing a database offline/online and it seems the action taken on the Enterprise manager (2000) or Studio Manager (2005) will reflect the change by the other. Is this how it supposed to be? I did download the technical reference but thought I run through this site first. TIA, tnt |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |