Mixed environment x64 and x86 (compatibility)

I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I would
like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
questions:
can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?
If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
(x64 and x86) to download?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=E719ECF7-9F46-4312-AF89-6AD8702E4E6E&displaylang=en
Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
experience ..
thanks
Julio M
Hi
"Julio Mattos" wrote:

> I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I would
> like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
> SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
> questions:
> can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
The backup file format is the same on both machines. The database file
format has not changed either, therefore you can move these from one platform
to the next without issues.

> Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?

> If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
> (x64 and x86) to download?
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=E719ECF7-9F46-4312-AF89-6AD8702E4E6E&displaylang=en
This is probably because of the samples being deployed on different platforms.

> Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
> experience ..
You should deploy this because you need a platform that is better suited for
the 64 bit environment i.e. better memory usage, better processors etc.

> thanks
> Julio M
>
John

Mixed environment x64 and x86 (compatibility)

I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I would
like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
questions:
can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?
If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
(x64 and x86) to download?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=E719ECF7-9F46-4312-AF89-6AD8702E4E6E&displaylang=en
Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
experience ..
thanks
Julio MHi
"Julio Mattos" wrote:
> I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I would
> like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
> SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
> questions:
> can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
The backup file format is the same on both machines. The database file
format has not changed either, therefore you can move these from one platform
to the next without issues.
> Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?
> If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
> (x64 and x86) to download?
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=E719ECF7-9F46-4312-AF89-6AD8702E4E6E&displaylang=en
This is probably because of the samples being deployed on different platforms.
> Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
> experience ..
You should deploy this because you need a platform that is better suited for
the 64 bit environment i.e. better memory usage, better processors etc.
> thanks
> Julio M
>
John

Mixed environment x64 and x86 (compatibility)

I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I woul
d
like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
questions:
can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?
If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
(x64 and x86) to download?
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...&displaylang=en
Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
experience ..
thanks
Julio MHi
"Julio Mattos" wrote:

> I have all sql servers running 32bit. We need another SQL cluster and I wo
uld
> like to install SQL2005 x64. My concerns are the compatibility between
> SQL2000 32bit, SQL2005 32bit and the new one:
> questions:
> can I restore a x64 database to a 32bit SQL Server?
The backup file format is the same on both machines. The database file
format has not changed either, therefore you can move these from one platfor
m
to the next without issues.

> Anyone has had compatibility issues using a mixed environment?

> If there is no difference, why there are different AdventureWorks versions
> (x64 and x86) to download?
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...&displaylang=en
This is probably because of the samples being deployed on different platform
s.

> Microsoft says there is no problem, but I would like to hear some real
> experience ..
You should deploy this because you need a platform that is better suited for
the 64 bit environment i.e. better memory usage, better processors etc.

> thanks
> Julio M
>
John

Misterious Change of Compatibility Level in a Data Base

Hi everybody:

We have recently migrated our DDBB from SQL 2000 to SQL 2005 in several Servers. We have 2 DDBB per Server and the size of mdf files are between 10 and 40 GB.

We put Compatibility Level in 90 in SQL 2005 but when we arrive at work we see that our Maintenace Plans failed because the Compatibility Level of one of Data Bases changed to 70.

We have a Trace executing the whole day registrying the execution of stored procedure 'sp_dbcmptlevel' but in despite of Compatibility Level changes, the Trace does not registry anything.

Has anyone passed before me for this situation? Thank you in advance and greetings,

Nuria

After migrating (backup/restore or detach /attahc) to SQL Server 2005 have u changed the Comaptibility level? By default, the compatibility level will be 80. What was the compatibility leve of this database in sql 2000? check that. I assume that it was 70

Madhu

|||

your sql 2000 db probably would have had a compatability of either 80 or 70 (65,60 are not supported in sql 2005).......so once you restore it in sql 2005 it would be in the default compatability level as it was in sql 2000 unless you manually change it.......

|||

Yes, after migrating (attach in our case) to SQL 2005 we have changed the Compatibility Level to 90.

Not sure what was the Compatibility Level before migrating of this specific Server because we have 52 Servers in total; some of them had 65, others had 70 and other had 80.

The amazing thing is that Compatibility Level changes alone from 90 to 70.

|||

Yes, after migrating (attach in our case) to SQL 2005 we have changed the Compatibility Level to 90.

The amazing thing is that Compatibility Level changes alone from 90 to 70.

Missing SqlDataReader.GetSqlMetaData() in April CTP

Where did the GetSqlMetaData method go? I am trying to compare the SQL data types of two different columns to ensure compatibility prior to data transfer. The closest thing I can find in the April CTP is the DataReader.GetSchemaTable() which describes the columns' data types in .NET data types, not SQL data types. Any suggestions?

SMX_Mark wrote:

Where did the GetSqlMetaData method go? I am trying to compare the SQL data types of two different columns to ensure compatibility prior to data transfer. The closest thing I can find in the April CTP is the DataReader.GetSchemaTable() which describes the columns' data types in .NET data types, not SQL data types. Any suggestions?

I believe it was cut at the same time as the merge between the server and client provider happened.
Niels