Going from a stand-alone SQL 2000 environment to a clustered SQL 2005
environment is a big step. I would hesitate to do both steps at once, and I
have had a lot of practice at version upgrades and cluster installations. I
also don't like upgrades, especially on a cluster. I strongly prefer
systems built with only the current versions. Also, there have been some
reports of difficulties with the cluster upgrade process for SQL 2005. I am
reluctant to recommend it until I can do some more testing.
In theory, you can log ship from SQL 2000 to SQL 2005, but I would set up a
test environment and make sure. You will have to use your own scripts to
manage log shipping, neither of the built-in versions will work.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
[quoted text, click to view] "mecn" <mecn2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OfKW7ScUGHA.5288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> I have a new cluster server not sure whether I should install sql 2k or
> sql 2005.
> I need to move all prodcution dbs from regular sql2k server to the cluster
> box.
> What is the best way to move?
> Install sql2k first move all dbs including sys dbs and then upgrade to sql
> 2005.
> This will save me a lot of works ---sql jobs. Is this possible?
>
> My second question is that After I upgrade the cluster to sql 2005. Can I
> still do the log shipping from regual sql2k to this cluster sql2005?
>
> Thanks,.
>
>
>