Assessing needs to install one more SQL server for MOM

I am trying to avoid installing more SQL servers than what I need. This is
the scenario, please let me know if I have justification to buy a SQL server
license to install MOM on local computer or I can use this on my MainSQL
server instead:
a) I need to configure such SQL server for MOM and MOM best practices
require to allow only "Windows authentication". I have virtually dozens of
third-party applications that rely on that SQL server and I do not know if
by changing configuration to "Windows authentication only" to satisfy MOM
setup that could eventually break something down the road.
b) I have to enable IIS on such SQL server box. CUrrently MainSQL server has
no IIS enabled. That would be just a security issue, but I guess so many
applications require to have IIS installed these days...
Do you think the above is enough to make me buy a SQL server license
dedicated for MOM ?And a poster kindly reminded that instances would do work here and allow me
to configure the "Windows authentication only". From reading the SQL help
files, I see that instances are generally not recommended for SQL-production
environment (this is my case here, I will be using MOM in production
environment).
If you have any input on how SQL instances are doing in real world, please
let me know.
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brown@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eBkAAqU4EHA.708@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I am trying to avoid installing more SQL servers than what I need. This is
> the scenario, please let me know if I have justification to buy a SQL
> server
> license to install MOM on local computer or I can use this on my MainSQL
> server instead:
> a) I need to configure such SQL server for MOM and MOM best practices
> require to allow only "Windows authentication". I have virtually dozens of
> third-party applications that rely on that SQL server and I do not know if
> by changing configuration to "Windows authentication only" to satisfy MOM
> setup that could eventually break something down the road.
> b) I have to enable IIS on such SQL server box. CUrrently MainSQL server
> has
> no IIS enabled. That would be just a security issue, but I guess so many
> applications require to have IIS installed these days...
> Do you think the above is enough to make me buy a SQL server license
> dedicated for MOM ?
>|||They are harder to manage because now you have two sets of executibles that
must be serviced and could be corrupted by OS fixes including two sets of
perf counters, etc., etc., etc.
I'd consider running MOM on another server that's less used. You should
never run the monitoring process on the item that you are monitoring. You
will affect the outcomes of those observations. Your management pieces
should always be on another host and do their monitoring remotely.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%230%23r8eY4EHA.2196@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
And a poster kindly reminded that instances would do work here and allow me
to configure the "Windows authentication only". From reading the SQL help
files, I see that instances are generally not recommended for SQL-production
environment (this is my case here, I will be using MOM in production
environment).
If you have any input on how SQL instances are doing in real world, please
let me know.
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brown@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eBkAAqU4EHA.708@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I am trying to avoid installing more SQL servers than what I need. This is
> the scenario, please let me know if I have justification to buy a SQL
> server
> license to install MOM on local computer or I can use this on my MainSQL
> server instead:
> a) I need to configure such SQL server for MOM and MOM best practices
> require to allow only "Windows authentication". I have virtually dozens of
> third-party applications that rely on that SQL server and I do not know if
> by changing configuration to "Windows authentication only" to satisfy MOM
> setup that could eventually break something down the road.
> b) I have to enable IIS on such SQL server box. CUrrently MainSQL server
> has
> no IIS enabled. That would be just a security issue, but I guess so many
> applications require to have IIS installed these days...
> Do you think the above is enough to make me buy a SQL server license
> dedicated for MOM ?
>|||I agree. I will buy a SQL server license now !!!.
"AnthonyThomas" <Anthony.Thomas@.CommerceBank.com> wrote in message
news:%23frmjIe4EHA.3864@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> They are harder to manage because now you have two sets of executibles
> that
> must be serviced and could be corrupted by OS fixes including two sets of
> perf counters, etc., etc., etc.
> I'd consider running MOM on another server that's less used. You should
> never run the monitoring process on the item that you are monitoring. You
> will affect the outcomes of those observations. Your management pieces
> should always be on another host and do their monitoring remotely.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%230%23r8eY4EHA.2196@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> And a poster kindly reminded that instances would do work here and allow
> me
> to configure the "Windows authentication only". From reading the SQL help
> files, I see that instances are generally not recommended for
> SQL-production
> environment (this is my case here, I will be using MOM in production
> environment).
> If you have any input on how SQL instances are doing in real world, please
> let me know.
>
> "Marlon Brown" <marlon_brown@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eBkAAqU4EHA.708@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>I am trying to avoid installing more SQL servers than what I need. This is
>> the scenario, please let me know if I have justification to buy a SQL
>> server
>> license to install MOM on local computer or I can use this on my MainSQL
>> server instead:
>> a) I need to configure such SQL server for MOM and MOM best practices
>> require to allow only "Windows authentication". I have virtually dozens
>> of
>> third-party applications that rely on that SQL server and I do not know
>> if
>> by changing configuration to "Windows authentication only" to satisfy MOM
>> setup that could eventually break something down the road.
>> b) I have to enable IIS on such SQL server box. CUrrently MainSQL server
>> has
>> no IIS enabled. That would be just a security issue, but I guess so many
>> applications require to have IIS installed these days...
>> Do you think the above is enough to make me buy a SQL server license
>> dedicated for MOM ?
>>
>

Assessing needs to install one more SQL server for MOM

I am trying to avoid installing more SQL servers than what I need. This is
the scenario, please let me know if I have justification to buy a SQL server
license to install MOM on local computer or I can use this on my MainSQL
server instead:
a) I need to configure such SQL server for MOM and MOM best practices
require to allow only "Windows authentication". I have virtually dozens of
third-party applications that rely on that SQL server and I do not know if
by changing configuration to "Windows authentication only" to satisfy MOM
setup that could eventually break something down the road.
b) I have to enable IIS on such SQL server box. CUrrently MainSQL server has
no IIS enabled. That would be just a security issue, but I guess so many
applications require to have IIS installed these days...
Do you think the above is enough to make me buy a SQL server license
dedicated for MOM ?
And a poster kindly reminded that instances would do work here and allow me
to configure the "Windows authentication only". From reading the SQL help
files, I see that instances are generally not recommended for SQL-production
environment (this is my case here, I will be using MOM in production
environment).
If you have any input on how SQL instances are doing in real world, please
let me know.
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brown@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eBkAAqU4EHA.708@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I am trying to avoid installing more SQL servers than what I need. This is
> the scenario, please let me know if I have justification to buy a SQL
> server
> license to install MOM on local computer or I can use this on my MainSQL
> server instead:
> a) I need to configure such SQL server for MOM and MOM best practices
> require to allow only "Windows authentication". I have virtually dozens of
> third-party applications that rely on that SQL server and I do not know if
> by changing configuration to "Windows authentication only" to satisfy MOM
> setup that could eventually break something down the road.
> b) I have to enable IIS on such SQL server box. CUrrently MainSQL server
> has
> no IIS enabled. That would be just a security issue, but I guess so many
> applications require to have IIS installed these days...
> Do you think the above is enough to make me buy a SQL server license
> dedicated for MOM ?
>
|||They are harder to manage because now you have two sets of executibles that
must be serviced and could be corrupted by OS fixes including two sets of
perf counters, etc., etc., etc.
I'd consider running MOM on another server that's less used. You should
never run the monitoring process on the item that you are monitoring. You
will affect the outcomes of those observations. Your management pieces
should always be on another host and do their monitoring remotely.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%230%23r8eY4EHA.2196@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
And a poster kindly reminded that instances would do work here and allow me
to configure the "Windows authentication only". From reading the SQL help
files, I see that instances are generally not recommended for SQL-production
environment (this is my case here, I will be using MOM in production
environment).
If you have any input on how SQL instances are doing in real world, please
let me know.
"Marlon Brown" <marlon_brown@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eBkAAqU4EHA.708@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I am trying to avoid installing more SQL servers than what I need. This is
> the scenario, please let me know if I have justification to buy a SQL
> server
> license to install MOM on local computer or I can use this on my MainSQL
> server instead:
> a) I need to configure such SQL server for MOM and MOM best practices
> require to allow only "Windows authentication". I have virtually dozens of
> third-party applications that rely on that SQL server and I do not know if
> by changing configuration to "Windows authentication only" to satisfy MOM
> setup that could eventually break something down the road.
> b) I have to enable IIS on such SQL server box. CUrrently MainSQL server
> has
> no IIS enabled. That would be just a security issue, but I guess so many
> applications require to have IIS installed these days...
> Do you think the above is enough to make me buy a SQL server license
> dedicated for MOM ?
>
|||I agree. I will buy a SQL server license now !!!.
"AnthonyThomas" <Anthony.Thomas@.CommerceBank.com> wrote in message
news:%23frmjIe4EHA.3864@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> They are harder to manage because now you have two sets of executibles
> that
> must be serviced and could be corrupted by OS fixes including two sets of
> perf counters, etc., etc., etc.
> I'd consider running MOM on another server that's less used. You should
> never run the monitoring process on the item that you are monitoring. You
> will affect the outcomes of those observations. Your management pieces
> should always be on another host and do their monitoring remotely.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "Marlon Brown" <marlon_brownj@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%230%23r8eY4EHA.2196@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> And a poster kindly reminded that instances would do work here and allow
> me
> to configure the "Windows authentication only". From reading the SQL help
> files, I see that instances are generally not recommended for
> SQL-production
> environment (this is my case here, I will be using MOM in production
> environment).
> If you have any input on how SQL instances are doing in real world, please
> let me know.
>
> "Marlon Brown" <marlon_brown@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eBkAAqU4EHA.708@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>

ASP-Application

Hi,
i have my application running with two servers ( iis - sql
server ).
What is securest way to access from the first workstation
(iis) on the second ( sql server ) ?
With an DSN or a Connection String ?
I am running a ASP-application !
Greetings,
Daniel RakojevicYou could run your application on the IIS server under the context of an acc
ount (domain or local to the SQL server), grant this account access to the d
atabase, and then set the DSN on the IIS box to use trusted_connection=YES.
if you need to secure the data in transit, you could also enable SSL encrypt
ion on the SQL Server:
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...kb;en-us;316898
--Roberto
-- Daniel Rakojevic wrote: --
Hi,
i have my application running with two servers ( iis - sql
server ).
What is securest way to access from the first workstation
(iis) on the second ( sql server ) ?
With an DSN or a Connection String ?
I am running a ASP-application !
Greetings,
Daniel Rakojevic

ASP.Net with SQL-DMO

Any help is appreciated!

I try to convert a VB 6 program to ASP.Net.

The original vb 6 program uses SQL-DMO to gather information from SQL Servers using 'Microsoft SQLDMO Object Library':

vb6:
Referenced te DMO inside VB 6
Dim oSQLSvr2 As New SQLServer2

ASP.Net:

I got Compiler Error Message: BC30002: Type 'SQLServer2' is not defined.

ASP.Net source code:

<%@. Page Language="VB" Debug="TRUE" %>
<%@. Import namespace="System.Data" %>
<%@.Import namespace="System.Data.OLeDb"%>
<%@.Import namespace=""sqldmo"%>
<%@.Import namespace=""sqldmo.SQLServer2"%
<script runat="Server">
Sub btn_Click(S As Object, e As EventArgs)
Dim oSQLSvr2 as New SQLServer2

oSQLSvr2.LoginTimeout = 30
oSQLSvr2.LoginSecure = True
oSQLSvr2.Connect "ORGDEV03"
End Sub
</Script
<html>
<head><title>test
</title></head>
<body>
<form runat="Server">
Title
<p/>
<asp:Button Text="Connect to SQL Server" OnClick="btn_Click" Runat="Server"/
</form>
</body
</html>There is no namespace called sqldmo.SQLServer2, so you should remove that @.Import namespace line.

Instead of this:

Dim oSQLSvr2 as New SQLServer2

use this

Dim oSQLSvr2 AS New SQLDMO.SQLServer2

Terri|||It is still doesn't work. Any help?|||I tried the exact code following and it works fine on my machine (one thing I did notice with your code is that you can an extra double quote in your Import namespace="sqldmo" directive):

<%@. Page Language="VB" Debug="TRUE" %>
<%@. Import namespace="System.Data" %>
<%@. Import namespace="System.Data.OLeDb"%>
<%@. Import namespace="sqldmo"%
<script runat="Server">
Sub btn_Click(S As Object, e As EventArgs)
Dim oSQLSvr2 as New SQLDMO.SQLServer2
oSQLSvr2.LoginTimeout = 30
oSQLSvr2.LoginSecure = True
oSQLSvr2.Connect("(local)")
End Sub
</Script
<html>
<head><title>test
</title></head>
<body>
<form runat="Server" ID="Form1">
Title
<p/>
<asp:Button Text="Connect to SQL Server" OnClick="btn_Click" Runat="Server" ID="Button1" NAME="Button1"/
</form>
</body
</html>

Terri|||Terri,

I am not using VS.Net Environment to create the ASP.net Page. That's why mine doesn't work.

The sqldmo.dll (referenced in my code) is a COM object(not .Net Assembly) so that the namespace is not imported in my code.

To resolve this problem, I copy and paste my code in VS.Net and compile it. Then copy the \bin\Interop.sqldmol.dll to my ASP.Net application root directory. It works fine.

Thank again.

Pak