Solved

Migrating from SQL 2000 to SQL 2008

Posted on 2014-03-10
3
314 Views
Last Modified: 2014-03-11
We are moving our Intranet database that is SQL 2000 and all the coding to a new server with SQL 2008 STD. Is it better to go to SQL 2008 or SQL 2008 R2?

Also any links or help in the best method to keep everything in compatibility/native would be ideal.  This is new for us so any assistance offered would be appreciated.
0
Comment
Question by:regsamp
  • 2
3 Comments
 
LVL 16

Accepted Solution

by:
DcpKing earned 500 total points
ID: 39918577
My suggestions (having done just that ):

1. Go to 2008 R2 - the next leap will be easier!.
2. If you have a heap of DTS then migrate it - don't try to use it as-is. Pragmatic Works has a good tool for doing this.
3. If you have "order by" in a view it works in 2000 but not later: adapt by changing the select from "select " to "select 100% " and test!
4. Test your move first - so don't do an upgrade; rather install a new server and move your systems one-by-one/
5. Don't wait so long next time!

I'm sure that there are other gotchas, but none that I remember off-hand.
Keep asking questions!

Good luck

hth

Mike
0
 

Author Comment

by:regsamp
ID: 39918591
Do you think this method can work?

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5620269/migrate-from-sql-server-2000-to-2008-r2-how-to

Also do you have an article for the "If you have "order by" in a view it works in 2000 but not later: adapt by changing the select from "select " to "select 100% " and test!" We have to run this by the programmer.
0
 
LVL 16

Expert Comment

by:DcpKing
ID: 39919557
Yes, the physical migration by using backup and restore should work - try it and see!
If you're wondering about checking on whether something will work or not before committing to buying 2008 or 2008R2 (why not 2012 or 2014?) then you should be able to get Developer Editions  - they're normally $50 from Amazon - there or on eBay, and then you can try out how your move will work.

As for the select top 100%, please eexcuse me - I missed a word or two (my bad). What I meant to say was that an order by in a view used to seem to work when used with top 100%, but no longer (in fact, it was never part of the spec either way). What you need to do now to get an order by to work is to use "select top n field from table", where n is greater than the number of rows being returned. A little crazy, but really, order by isn't supported in this way in views - your programmer should really be using a stored procedure. Articles to support? not really - just something I found when migrating a 2000 db to 2005 and then 2008. The Access front end application suddenly didn't have nicely-ordered combo-boxes any more!

hth

Mike
0

Featured Post

Simplifying Server Workload Migrations

This use case outlines the migration challenges that organizations face and how the Acronis AnyData Engine supports physical-to-physical (P2P), physical-to-virtual (P2V), virtual to physical (V2P), and cross-virtual (V2V) migration scenarios to address these challenges.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Ever needed a SQL 2008 Database replicated/mirrored/log shipped on another server but you can't take the downtime inflicted by initial snapshot or disconnect while T-logs are restored or mirror applied? You can use SQL Server Initialize from Backup…
I have a large data set and a SSIS package. How can I load this file in multi threading?
Via a live example, show how to extract insert data into a SQL Server database table using the Import/Export option and Bulk Insert.
Via a live example, show how to set up a backup for SQL Server using a Maintenance Plan and how to schedule the job into SQL Server Agent.

831 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question