I agree with Mike & Geoff. All my clustered SQL instances have always
been named instances. Technically there are no disadvantages I can
Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP) wrote:
>Hi
>
>It also makes it "harder" to connect to the wrong instance. You have to know
>which instance you are connecting to. Those drop table scripts that people
>like to use tend to cause havoc when they run it against the wrong instance.
>
>Regards
>--------------------------------
>Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>Zurich, Switzerland
>
>IM: mike@epprecht.net
>
>MVP Program:
http://www.microsoft.com/mvp >
>Blog:
http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/ >
>"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ejqm6r6GFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
>
>>Personally, I prefer all named instances. It makes explaining connection
>>strings to the dev team a much simpler task since they all look alike.
>>
>>--
>>Geoff N. Hiten
>>Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>>Senior Database Administrator
>>Careerbuilder.com
>>
>>I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
>>
www.sqlpass.org >>
>>"Rubens Luque Sanches Junior" <rubensluque@yahoo.com.br> wrote in message
>>news:O09EZE5GFHA.580@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>
>>
>>>What is the better to use in active/active SQL 2000 cluster ?
>>>
>>>1 Default instance and 1 named instance
>>>
>>>or 2 Named Instances ?
>>>
>>>There are any advantages or disadvantages ?
>>>
>>>thanks a lot !
>>>Rubens
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>