MSDN - upgrade to Windows??

Author

upgrade to Windows??

Menuz2

2005-02-08, 3:55 pm

Hello all:

I have a small business network. Currently I use Linux (Slackware) as a mail
server and it works great. Unfortunately, I am in the process of purchasing
a critical business application that uses an SQL server and the vendor only
support MS SQL Server. While I could screw around and try to make this work
with MySQL/ODBC (this is an ODBC app), I really don't want the headaches of
having to admin this especially if there are problems. So the question is,
do I buy an new box with the Small Business Server on it, do I buy a copy of
just SQL Server 2000 (which seems to be more expensive that SBS!), or do I
just try to make this work with MySQL. Also, if I go with SBS, should I
switch to Exchange for email and WebMail, etc. Right now I am Linux with
Apache and Cyrus IMAP.

Opinions appreciated. Thanks in advance,

Nuz

mageos

2005-02-08, 8:56 pm

Menuz2 wrote:
> Hello all:
>
> I have a small business network. Currently I use Linux (Slackware) as a mail
> server and it works great. Unfortunately, I am in the process of purchasing
> a critical business application that uses an SQL server and the vendor only
> support MS SQL Server. While I could screw around and try to make this work
> with MySQL/ODBC (this is an ODBC app), I really don't want the headaches of
> having to admin this especially if there are problems. So the question is,
> do I buy an new box with the Small Business Server on it, do I buy a copy of
> just SQL Server 2000 (which seems to be more expensive that SBS!), or do I
> just try to make this work with MySQL. Also, if I go with SBS, should I
> switch to Exchange for email and WebMail, etc. Right now I am Linux with
> apache and Cyrus IMAP.
>
> Opinions appreciated. Thanks in advance,
>
> Nuz
>
>

Most Versions of SQL Server require a Windows Server to install. SBS is
by far your best bet if you decide to use M$ SQL. The only version I
know of that does not is Developers Edition, but the liscense on it
would not allow you to use it in a production env. Find out if they
support MSDE. It is a toned done version of SQL Server 2000 that can be
freely distributed by your software vendor if they have a MSDN subscription.

Mark Cudworth

2005-02-08, 8:56 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Menuz2 wrote:

| Unfortunately, I am in the process of purchasing
| a critical business application that uses an SQL server and the vendor
only
| support MS SQL Server.

This is always a red flag for me. Forget all of the open-source
arguents: why don't they support Oracle? DB2? Sybase? Informix? If a
software company knows how to make a good software product, they can
make it use any standard (in this case, SQL-based) database. It sounds
to me like this software is being made by a company too lazy to do the
job right.

- --
Mark Cudworth
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFCCSapu+2TKcaIM28RAkgpAKCnELMb5TOj
n5krsJFB4dt+fa+DvACfdjjb
/NK8NnGiO5Yd7/IpB422350=
=At8j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Gerry Hickman

2005-02-08, 8:56 pm

Hi,

First thing you should do is find a better Vendor. But if you have to
run this, you could look into using MSDE (if the data is private to the
app). This is what Veritas use in their Backup Exec product. SQL server
and MSDE are glossy on the surface but look out for those Sybase
inspired DLLs!

You certainly do NOT need to switch to using Exchange for mail, and this
should be on a separate server anyway. You don't say what you're using
for User accounts or what o/s the client boxes are running. These
factors would make a big difference when working out a future platform
strategy.

Menuz2 wrote:

> Hello all:
>
> I have a small business network. Currently I use Linux (Slackware) as a mail
> server and it works great. Unfortunately, I am in the process of purchasing
> a critical business application that uses an SQL server and the vendor only
> support MS SQL Server. While I could screw around and try to make this work
> with MySQL/ODBC (this is an ODBC app), I really don't want the headaches of
> having to admin this especially if there are problems. So the question is,
> do I buy an new box with the Small Business Server on it, do I buy a copy of
> just SQL Server 2000 (which seems to be more expensive that SBS!), or do I
> just try to make this work with MySQL. Also, if I go with SBS, should I
> switch to Exchange for email and WebMail, etc. Right now I am Linux with
> apache and Cyrus IMAP.
>
> Opinions appreciated. Thanks in advance,
>
> Nuz
>
>

--
Gerry Hickman (London UK)

Blumf

2005-02-08, 8:56 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mark Cudworth wrote:

> This is always a red flag for me. Forget all of the open-source
> arguents: why don't they support Oracle? DB2? Sybase? Informix? If a
> software company knows how to make a good software product, they can
> make it use any standard (in this case, SQL-based) database. It sounds
> to me like this software is being made by a company too lazy to do the
> job right.

In fairness, once you get past basic SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE statements SQL
stops being standard. Stored procedures for one tend to be DB system
specific, but there can be many other subtle differences in syntax too.

Though MS SQL Server tends to be a sign of the dev team being lazy and
taking what MS gives them. There's no real excuse for not using a
multi-platform DB engine.

Blumf

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCCUiuMid3IcxolsoRAh/tAJ9cj8q4Xv470YuNYvQXgpPZVtuw5gCeJni5
uIUySA6c+01aqpLut0GM4hk=
=SUI5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Menuz2

2005-02-08, 8:56 pm

"Gerry Hickman" <gerry666uk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:OpsY1GiDFHA.520@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> First thing you should do is find a better Vendor. But if you have to run
> this, you could look into using MSDE (if the data is private to the app).
> This is what Veritas use in their Backup Exec product. SQL server and MSDE
> are glossy on the surface but look out for those Sybase inspired DLLs!
>
> You certainly do NOT need to switch to using Exchange for mail, and this
> should be on a separate server anyway. You don't say what you're using for
> User accounts or what o/s the client boxes are running. These factors
> would make a big difference when working out a future platform strategy.

Thanks. The clients are all XP and Outlook for email. The application is a
financial/accounting application that is specific to a particular body of
regulations. There are only two or three vendors of this type of software
and this is, in my opinion, the best one. Can an MSDE based DB be a server
to other workstations? That is a requrement. If I go with SBS, I could
concieveably use my existing workgroup server that runs Linux/Cyrus/Sendmail
for this entire application. The server would function occasionally as a
workstation. This is a very low intensity application. We only have four
or five users all of them part time.

Thanks,

Nuz

n00b

2005-02-09, 3:56 am

Menuz2 wrote:
> "Gerry Hickman" <gerry666uk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:OpsY1GiDFHA.520@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
to run[color=darkred]
app).[color=darkred]
and MSDE[color=darkred]
DLLs![color=darkred]
this[color=darkred]
using for[color=darkred]
factors[color=darkred]
strategy.[color=darkred]
>
> Thanks. The clients are all XP and Outlook for email. The
application is a
> financial/accounting application that is specific to a particular
body of
> regulations. There are only two or three vendors of this type of
software
> and this is, in my opinion, the best one. Can an MSDE based DB be a
server
> to other workstations? That is a requrement. If I go with SBS, I
could
> concieveably use my existing workgroup server that runs
Linux/Cyrus/Sendmail
> for this entire application. The server would function occasionally
as a
> workstation. This is a very low intensity application. We only have
four
> or five users all of them part time.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nuz

MSDE could be used if every database on the server is going to be under
2 gigs in size. If you want to have a GUI for administering the server
you have to purchase a third party tool(s). You can always learn the
required system stored procedures and execute them using the command
line utility. If database size is an obstacle to using MSDE, I'd go
with SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition. Yes, you need to have a server
version of Windows installed on the box to use the Standard Edition.
You can use just about any version of Windows to serve data from MSDE.

>From the Microsoft site:

MSDE 2000 is a royalty-free, redistributable database engine that is
fully compatible with SQL Server. MSDE 2000 is designed to run on
Microsoft Windows=AE 98, Windows Millennium Edition (Windows Me),
Microsoft Windows NT=AE Workstation version 4.0 (with Service Pack 5 or
later), and Windows 2000 Professional as an embedded database for
custom applications that require a local database engine.

An attractive alternative to using the Microsoft Jet database, MSDE
2000 is designed primarily to provide a low-cost option for developers
who need a database server that can be easily distributed and installed
with a value-added business solution. Because it is fully compatible
with other editions of SQL Server, developers can easily target both
SQL Server and MSDE 2000 with the same core code base. This provides a
seamless upgrade path from MSDE 2000 to SQL Server if an application
grows beyond the storage and scalability limits of MSDE 2000.

Gerry Hickman

2005-02-09, 8:56 pm

Hi Menuz2,

> Thanks. The clients are all XP and Outlook for email.

How are you interfacing Outlook to the Linux box? It would normally use
MAPI/Exchange. What protocol are you using?

> regulations. There are only two or three vendors of this type of software
> and this is, in my opinion, the best one.

OK.

> Can an MSDE based DB be a server
> to other workstations?

Not really.

> If I go with SBS, I could
> concieveably use my existing workgroup server that runs Linux/Cyrus/Sendmail
> for this entire application.

I don't understand. How can you use Linux/Cyrus/Sendmail to run an
application that requires SQL server?

> The server would function occasionally as a
> workstation. This is a very low intensity application. We only have four
> or five users all of them part time.

I've always avoided SBS. If you've decided to commit to SQL server you
probably want to be running it on a full spec operating system.

--
Gerry Hickman (London UK)

Menuz2

2005-02-10, 3:56 am

Hi Gerry:

> I don't understand. How can you use Linux/Cyrus/Sendmail to run an
> application that requires SQL server?

Sorry for the confusion.

Clients are XP and use Outlook for email against Cyrus (IMAP) on the Linux
box. If I go with SBS, I would be moving it on to this workgroup server and
dumping Linux/Cyrus. The new application needs MS SQL. I have a tight
budget and want to avoid buying a new box. So if I go with SBS, I would be
on this box and now the Outlook clients will connect to Exchange. The new
application is extremely low volume. Only a few part timers will be using
it.

I am toying with the idea of biting the bullet and buying an new box. In
any event, a new small server with SBS is about $2500 from Dell. Why not!
On the other hand, I can pick up a 5 seat version of SBS for about $700.
This is currently the choice, or can you recommend something else.

BTW, if I go with full blown MS SQL, then we are looking at about $2800 for
the box with W2003 server on it and then another $1500 for MSSQL and some
more for additional CALs. It is amazing how relatively inexpensive, in
Microsoft reality, SBS is over an OS and DB! I wonder what the downside is?

Nuz

Sponsored Links