Installing SQL Server 2005, then upgrading to Windows 2003 from 20

We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to SQL
Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with plans
to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the SQL
Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it recommended
to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a difference?
I haven't tried this sequence, but here is what I have learned fro upgrades
in the past. I prefer to upgrade in release sequence. Therefore, upgrade
to Windows 2003 then upgrade SQL 2000 to SQL 2005. Personally, I don't like
upgrading in place. I try to rebuild servers from scratch when I get a
chance. I use home-grown log shipping scripts to handle the cutover and can
generally keep the downtime to just a few minutes. Of course, this requires
a bit of spare hardware and some decent prep time but I really like having a
clean build. You also have the existing server as a fail-back for however
long you choose.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"SandiDBA" <SandiDBA@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D594190B-9FA1-4E80-BE41-E7C1680768F2@.microsoft.com...
> We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to
> SQL
> Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with
> plans
> to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the
> SQL
> Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it
> recommended
> to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
> should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a
> difference?
|||Hi
I would concur with Geoff, as Windows 2003 is an environmental change is
should have less impact and less likely to require any application changes
(although configuration changes may be necessary!) and therefore I would do
it first. An upgrade to SQL 2005 is more likely to require code changes and
so require more time for preparation and testing.
John
"SandiDBA" <SandiDBA@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D594190B-9FA1-4E80-BE41-E7C1680768F2@.microsoft.com...
> We have plans to upgrade all our current SQL Server 2000 SP4 servers to
> SQL
> Server 2005. Most of those servers are running on Windows 2000 with
> plans
> to also upgrade to Windows 2003. Are there any risks to upgrading the
> SQL
> Server, then upgrading the OS to 2003 at a later time? Or is it
> recommended
> to upgrade the OS, then SQL Server for better results? In other words,
> should these upgrades be tied together or does really not make a
> difference?