Both versions of SQL Server on one server

Can I install SQL Server 7.0 SP2 as a Default version and
SQL Server 2000 SP3 as a named version on a WIndows 2000
SP3 server '
We will run Connect-Care (Customer-First) Application
against SQL Server 7.0 version and Solomon 5.5 against SQL
Server 2000 version.
Anybody see any problem with this '
Thanks for any help.Check out
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?
url=/library/en-us/instsql/in_runsetup_0svo.asp
Peter
"Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them."
Ronald Reagan
>--Original Message--
>Can I install SQL Server 7.0 SP2 as a Default version and
>SQL Server 2000 SP3 as a named version on a WIndows 2000
>SP3 server '
>We will run Connect-Care (Customer-First) Application
>against SQL Server 7.0 version and Solomon 5.5 against
SQL
>Server 2000 version.
>Anybody see any problem with this '
>Thanks for any help.
>.
>|||Rick,
Yep, should work fine. I have found it preferable to install SQL Server
7.0 first, then install SQL 2000 as a named instance. Remember to
configure your memory settings so that they aren't competing with each
other for RAM.
--
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
Rick wrote:
> Can I install SQL Server 7.0 SP2 as a Default version and
> SQL Server 2000 SP3 as a named version on a WIndows 2000
> SP3 server '
> We will run Connect-Care (Customer-First) Application
> against SQL Server 7.0 version and Solomon 5.5 against SQL
> Server 2000 version.
> Anybody see any problem with this '
> Thanks for any help.|||I hope that installing service packs should not be a
problem....
>--Original Message--
>Rick,
>Yep, should work fine. I have found it preferable to
install SQL Server
>7.0 first, then install SQL 2000 as a named instance.
Remember to
>configure your memory settings so that they aren't
competing with each
>other for RAM.
>--
>Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
>http://www.markallison.co.uk
>Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
>
>Rick wrote:
>> Can I install SQL Server 7.0 SP2 as a Default version
and
>> SQL Server 2000 SP3 as a named version on a WIndows
2000
>> SP3 server '
>> We will run Connect-Care (Customer-First) Application
>> against SQL Server 7.0 version and Solomon 5.5 against
SQL
>> Server 2000 version.
>> Anybody see any problem with this '
>> Thanks for any help.
>.
>|||Rick,
No problem! You can even have two instances of SQL Server 2000 running
at different service pack levels. (Not that you'd want to though).
--
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
Rick wrote:
> I hope that installing service packs should not be a
> problem....
>
>>--Original Message--
>>Rick,
>>Yep, should work fine. I have found it preferable to
> install SQL Server
>>7.0 first, then install SQL 2000 as a named instance.
> Remember to
>>configure your memory settings so that they aren't
> competing with each
>>other for RAM.
>>--
>>Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
>>http://www.markallison.co.uk
>>Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>>http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
>>
>>Rick wrote:
>>Can I install SQL Server 7.0 SP2 as a Default version
> and
>>SQL Server 2000 SP3 as a named version on a WIndows
> 2000
>>SP3 server '
>>We will run Connect-Care (Customer-First) Application
>>against SQL Server 7.0 version and Solomon 5.5 against
> SQL
>>Server 2000 version.
>>Anybody see any problem with this '
>>Thanks for any help.
>>.