I'm trying to install Veritas Back Exec 9.1 on my Windows 2003 server acting
as domain controller.
First event is:
MsiInstaller Event ID 1015
Failed to connect to server. Error: 0x800401F0
Then MsiInstaller Event ID 11707
1: 2: VERITAS Backup Exec for Windows Servers 3: 1: 1707
Then MsiInstaller Event ID 11708
Product: Microsoft SQL Server Desktop Engine -- Installation operation
failed.
What is the problem?
Could be the same prob that I have.
I have installede Backup Exec 9.1 to ′with MS SQL 2000 server
No I would like to add my dekstop and laptop option and this need to have the MSDE desktop , but my installation failes,
here is where I am comming to now
I need to find the Hotfix as stated in this artickel Knowledge Base-article - 829386
(You Cannot Install MSDE 2000 if the Server Service Is Not Running)
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;829386
anyone know where to find it ?
|||My server is domain controller.I have a member server running Windows 2003
and on it i can install Veritas without problems.Hm.....?!
|||You sure can, I would recommend installing BE 9.1 SP1
Showing posts with label controller. Show all posts
Showing posts with label controller. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
Installing SQL server on a domain controller?
Hi guys,
I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?
That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
be also.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Charles" wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
> should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
> just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?
|||thanks!
"AnthonyThomas" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
> A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
> installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
> makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
> DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
> distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
> Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
> Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
> of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
> on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
> this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
> be also.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> "Charles" wrote:
|||http://giuciao.altervista.org/free_books.html
"Charles" <Charles@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:<86D792B6-668D-4027-A953-945755BCB1DE@.microsoft.com>...[vbcol=seagreen]
> thanks!
> "AnthonyThomas" wrote:
I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?
That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
be also.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Charles" wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
> should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
> just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?
|||thanks!
"AnthonyThomas" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
> A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
> installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
> makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
> DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
> distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
> Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
> Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
> of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
> on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
> this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
> be also.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> "Charles" wrote:
|||http://giuciao.altervista.org/free_books.html
"Charles" <Charles@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:<86D792B6-668D-4027-A953-945755BCB1DE@.microsoft.com>...[vbcol=seagreen]
> thanks!
> "AnthonyThomas" wrote:
Installing SQL server on a domain controller?
Hi guys,
I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Serve
r
installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers
.
Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
be also.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Charles" wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL serv
er
> should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured
as
> just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?|||thanks!
"AnthonyThomas" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER
.
> A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Ser
ver
> installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
> makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
> DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power
of
> distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple serve
rs.
> Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
> Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installatio
n,
> of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
> on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
> this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network wou
ld
> be also.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> "Charles" wrote:
>|||http://giuciao.altervista.org/free_books.html
"Charles" <Charles@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:<86D792B6-668D-4027-A953
-945755BCB1DE@.microsoft.com>...[vbcol=seagreen]
> thanks!
> "AnthonyThomas" wrote:
>
I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Serve
r
installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers
.
Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
be also.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Charles" wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL serv
er
> should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured
as
> just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?|||thanks!
"AnthonyThomas" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER
.
> A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Ser
ver
> installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
> makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
> DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power
of
> distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple serve
rs.
> Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
> Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installatio
n,
> of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
> on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
> this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network wou
ld
> be also.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> "Charles" wrote:
>|||http://giuciao.altervista.org/free_books.html
"Charles" <Charles@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:<86D792B6-668D-4027-A953
-945755BCB1DE@.microsoft.com>...[vbcol=seagreen]
> thanks!
> "AnthonyThomas" wrote:
>
Installing SQL server on a domain controller?
Hi guys,
I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
be also.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Charles" wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
> should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
> just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?|||thanks!
"AnthonyThomas" wrote:
> That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
> A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
> installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
> makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
> DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
> distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
> Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
> Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
> of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
> on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
> this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
> be also.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> "Charles" wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> > I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> > Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
> > should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> > outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
> > just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?|||http://giuciao.altervista.org/free_books.html
"Charles" <Charles@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:<86D792B6-668D-4027-A953-945755BCB1DE@.microsoft.com>...
> thanks!
> "AnthonyThomas" wrote:
> > That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
> > A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
> > installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
> > makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
> > DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
> > distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
> > Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
> >
> > Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
> > of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
> > on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
> > this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
> > be also.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> >
> > Anthony Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> > "Charles" wrote:
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > > I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> > > Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
> > > should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> > > outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
> > > just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?
I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
be also.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Charles" wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
> should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
> just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?|||thanks!
"AnthonyThomas" wrote:
> That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
> A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
> installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
> makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
> DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
> distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
> Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
> Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
> of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
> on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
> this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
> be also.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> "Charles" wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> > I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> > Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
> > should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> > outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
> > just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?|||http://giuciao.altervista.org/free_books.html
"Charles" <Charles@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:<86D792B6-668D-4027-A953-945755BCB1DE@.microsoft.com>...
> thanks!
> "AnthonyThomas" wrote:
> > That's an old copy you are reading. DO NOT INSTALL ON A DOMAIN CONTROLLER.
> > A Domain Controller has too much network traffic to compete with a SQL Server
> > installation. You will reduce the responsiveness of both. Moreover, what
> > makes a DBMS efficient is the exclusive use of large memory. This makes a
> > DBMS system unusfull as any other cohosted application system. The power of
> > distributed computing is the dedication of function accross multiple servers.
> > Each server should be dedicated to a SINGLE role, or function.
> >
> > Lastly, this is a huge potential security issue. A SQL Server installation,
> > of necessity, controls most of the resources on the server it is installed
> > on. If this is a domain controller, this means the security database. If
> > this installation was compromised, this would mean your entire network would
> > be also.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> >
> > Anthony Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> > "Charles" wrote:
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > > I'm currently working on my MCDBA and I happen to be using the Microsoft
> > > Press edition. The book states the server that you plan to intall SQL server
> > > should be configured as a domain controller. From reading and listening to
> > > outside experts, I've always thought that the server should be configured as
> > > just a member server. Can someone clear this up for me?
Friday, February 24, 2012
Installing SQL Express 2K5 on a domain controller?
I want to install SQL Express 2K5 on a lightly used second Windows 2003 SP1 DC. I know about the warning not to do this type of install. However, the group is small and their budget does not allow for another server just for one application. With that being said, the error message I keep getting is "can't create local groups......" (I know that you do not have local groups with AD). So, is there a work around to this issue or can someone point me in the right direction as how to install on a domain controller? Thanks in advance for your time!!!Security Note: We recommend against running SQL Server Express on a domain controller.
hi,
please have a look at http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/1/0/f10c4f60-630e-4153-bd53-c3010e4c513b/ReadmeSQLEXP2005.htm, paragraph 3.10
regards
|||Andrea,
Thanks for the link, however that is the reason for the post. Paragrph 3.10 states "
3.10 Installing SQL Server Express on a Windows Domain Controller
It is possible to install SQL Server Express on a Windows domain controller; however, it cannot run on a Windows Server 2003 domain controller as Local Service or Network Service. SQL Server service accounts should run as Windows domain user accounts. It is also possible to install SQL Server service accounts to run as Local System, but this option is not recommended."
I just need to know how to get SQLExpress to install without trying to create local accounts and use a specific network user account. Again thanks for your time and effort.
|||You will have to create specific domain accounts for the SQL Server Services -BEFORE you attempt to install. Here are some articles with information about what accounts are needed and why.
Configuration -Service Accounts, SQL Server 2005 - Setting Up Windows Service Accounts
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143691.aspx
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143504.aspx
Configuration -Service Accounts, SQL Server or SQL Server Agent service account
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/283811/en-us
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143691.aspx
Configuration -Service Accounts,Selecting an Account for the SQL Server Agent Service
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms191543.aspx
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/907557
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)