SPAADMIN
asked on
Share Point Advise needed about SQL and 2003 servers.
I’m looking an implementing Share point services and I need some advice. I will give my idea and look for some input. I have to purchase what I’m going to use this week because of budget restraints.
First is my budget is very limited so I’m looking at a cheaper solution than I would like. I have SQL 7.0 running on Windows 2000 servers. It’s my understanding that a SharePoint service has a 2 gig limit of data with the free version and that it needs SQL 2000 or 2005 to expand past that. My question is can I run it on SQL 2005 Standard? I see on some post people are recommending 2005 enterprise and not standard and I never see a justification for it. My user will only use the shared Calendars, Contacts and Document sharing and I do not currently plan on building applications on this. My question is with minimal use would SQL standard not do what I need?
Secondly I have my current SQL running on a Windows 2000 server. Can I run share point on my 2003 server and link to the sql data base on my 2000 server or would it be necessary to upgrade the 2000 server to 2003?
Thanks for the help.
First is my budget is very limited so I’m looking at a cheaper solution than I would like. I have SQL 7.0 running on Windows 2000 servers. It’s my understanding that a SharePoint service has a 2 gig limit of data with the free version and that it needs SQL 2000 or 2005 to expand past that. My question is can I run it on SQL 2005 Standard? I see on some post people are recommending 2005 enterprise and not standard and I never see a justification for it. My user will only use the shared Calendars, Contacts and Document sharing and I do not currently plan on building applications on this. My question is with minimal use would SQL standard not do what I need?
Secondly I have my current SQL running on a Windows 2000 server. Can I run share point on my 2003 server and link to the sql data base on my 2000 server or would it be necessary to upgrade the 2000 server to 2003?
Thanks for the help.
Yes and Yes
SQL 2005 standard will do fine for a single-server scenario.
And sql2005 runs fine on Windows 2000, so you would not have to upgrade your OS on the DB server (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/standard/sysreqs.mspx)
SQL 2005 standard will do fine for a single-server scenario.
And sql2005 runs fine on Windows 2000, so you would not have to upgrade your OS on the DB server (http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/standard/sysreqs.mspx)
ASKER
We have around 150 users that could potential access the portal but it would be for static type documents that do not need to be linked to the sql ie HR forms .pdf type things. For the colabaration of the shared contacts calendars etc I would estimate aroun 50 user could use the callabaration alot.
All documents in your portal will be stored in the SQL database; static or not.
Collaboration of shared contacts and calendars is still best handled by Exchange. As Redwulf pointed out, everything in SharePoint is stored in SQL. The advantage of full SQL is that you get full text indexing as well... which can be a help if you have a lot of docs.
However, the best parts of SharePoint won't get utilized until you get Office 2003 at least... depending on your company, you could easily recoup the costs of such an upgrade... I've seen plenty of cases where SharePoint has saved thousands of dollars per employee by cutting out major amounts of work/waste.
But those cases are only when management understands that technology isn't an expense, but rather it should save them money. Your initial premise of "cheaper" could end up costing more in the long run (or even the short run).
Jeff
TechSoEasy
However, the best parts of SharePoint won't get utilized until you get Office 2003 at least... depending on your company, you could easily recoup the costs of such an upgrade... I've seen plenty of cases where SharePoint has saved thousands of dollars per employee by cutting out major amounts of work/waste.
But those cases are only when management understands that technology isn't an expense, but rather it should save them money. Your initial premise of "cheaper" could end up costing more in the long run (or even the short run).
Jeff
TechSoEasy
ASKER
I agree cheaper is not the way to go. But Im stuck with no budget for this and they are demanding colabaration. Another question then if I purchase SQL 2005 standard can I do the basic colabaration with Share Point Services or do I need to look seriousley at Share Point Portal. I guess what Im saying is what would the Portal give me the Services(free version) will not.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
and this is the quick view: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/830320
How many users are on your network?
Jeff
TechSoEasy