Are there any Amazon-provided Windows AMIs that have the .NET 4 framework pre-installed? Unless I'm missing something, it looks like 3.5 is available on the images (such as ami-cab91da3), but not .NET Framework 4.
If not, can we expect updates to the AMIs to include .NET 4 in the near future? It's been officially released for almost two years at this point. Or am I responsible for installing it and building (and maintaining) a custom AMI?
(cross-posted from AWS Forums)
The 'official ' Amazon EC2 AMIs for running Windows Server & SQL Server on Amazon EC2 (likely with Microsoft being involved in these offerings) primarily mirror respective official OS offerings from Microsoft (plus server versions eventually, like SQL Server or IIS). Therefore the .NET Framework 4 will only be pre-installed if either the provided OS (plus service pack) or the installed servers do require and respectively provide it as their default configuration.
That is the case with the recently Updated Microsoft SQL Server Offerings indeed, insofar SQL Server 2012 requires the .NET Framework 4 indeed, see Hardware and Software Requirements for Installing SQL Server 2012. Section Support for Microsoft SQL Server 2012 lists the respective AMI catalog entries accordingly:
SQL Server 2012 Express (AMI catalog entry)
SQL Server 2012 Web Edition (AMI catalog entry)
SQL Server 2012 Standard Edition (AMI catalog entry)
Related
I can't find this answer anywhere and maybe I'm just not getting it. I am installing TFS 2013.3 and I no matter what wizard I choose, there is no option to configure reporting services.
Environments tried:
Windows 7 Enterprise / MS SQL 2012 Express / TFS 2013.3 Express
Windows 8 Professional / MS SQL 2012 Developer / TFS 2013.3 Standard
I am about to try on a Windows Server 2012 SP1 machine shortly in case it has to be a server level machine. I looked on the MSDN for hardware and software support for both SQL/TFS and the above configurations are ok.
Pre-configuration tasks
SQL server pre-installed
SQL configured with Reporting and Analysis services enabled
User to install and configure both SQL and TFS is in the local Admin group
Used both the Basic and Advanced wizards during setup
I'm not sure what I am missing, but it seems that not doing something to be able to use the built in reports. It doesn't look like I need SharePoint for that.
Any ideas?
From MSDN:
You can install Team Foundation Server on a client computer that is
running one of the operating systems in the table. However, client
operating systems do not support integration with SharePoint Products,
reporting, or the ability to run TFS proxy. ...
If you want to use any of these features, you must install Team
Foundation Server on a server operating system.
Emphasis mine.
I have developed a application in c# which is windows based application. It stores data into database sql server. I want to know, when I create setup in VS and install it in a client computer should I install sql server software also or Is there any way without installing SQL Server in client's PC My application can function correctly.
sIf you use a filebased implementaion of SQL (localDB) you should be able to get away with a "setup" installing the neccecary dependencies to bootstrap the DB. (Someone correct me?)
If you use the DB in a hosted SQL environment (SQL Server running as a service), you will need to install SQL server on the deployed pc, and get the database up.
I am no sure if you can "automate" installing SQL server and getting the DB up from a setup app.
You have two deployment options for applications that contain SQL Server Compact 3.5 databases. The method of deployment you choose depends on the servicing requirements of your application and whether your users will need administrative credentials on the computer on which the application will be installed.
Following are the deployment options for SQL Server Compact 3.5 databases:
1. Traditional Microsoft Windows Installer (Microsoft setup technology)
a. Users need administrative credentials to install the application.
b. SQL Server Compact 3.5 will be serviced by Microsoft Update.
c. Can use ClickOnce deployment.
-or-
Private file–based deployment (deploying the SQL Server Compact 3.5 DLLs as part of the project)
1. Users do not need administrative credentials to install the application.
2. SQL Server Compact 3.5 will not be serviced by Microsoft Update.
3. Can also use ClickOnce deployment.
I'm looking to test some of the new features in Hyper-V 2012 (v3).
Hyper-V v3 can be downloaded as a "free" version "Hyper-V Server 2012", or it can be purchased as part of Windows Server 2012 Standard or datacenter. However, as usual licensing is unclear.
On the one hand MS talk about their free edition in several (many) sites. On the other hand, when you go to the actual download site it talks about a trial. To me a trial has an expiry date so it makes me nervous.
I could use my Windows Standard 2012 license as part of my Microsoft Action Pack Subscription (MAPS), but I'm not sure what I'm actually entitled to.
So my question is:
What are the real differences between the free (trial) download of Hyper-V Server 2012 and the paid-for Windows Server Core 2012 where you have to install with a key.
Does the "trial" version actually expire?
No, Hyper-V Server 2012 doesn't expire.
Hyper-V Server is quite a bit like Server Standard Core with all of the roles except Hyper-V (and other supporting roles and features) removed.
Now, in Server 2012, you can add the full UI back to the Server Core editions, but that's not an option with Hyper-V Server 2012 - it will always just be a command-line. That also means that the typical management UI tools won't run on Hyper-V Server 2012, so you'll need a machine that you can manage it from remotely (the PowerShell cmdlets for Hyper-V actually do work on Hyper-V Server, though).
Hyper-V Server isn't really for people who want to "play around" with Hyper-V - it's really designed for people who want to boost their Hyper-V infrastructure with more physical hosts, and who want to run a very lightweight OS in the root partition, leaving the most resources available for the VMs.
If you just want to get used to Hyper-V or test some things out with it, but you don't have experience with managing Hyper-V remotely already, stick with a full version of Windows Server (or Windows 8 Pro/Enterprise x64, which also have Hyper-V).
Is it possible to install SSRS and SQL Server database on separate servers, or should these two be installed on the same server?
Thanks
In order to have Reporting Services on your application server, you would have to use a SQL-Server license. You can install just the Reporting Services section of SQLServer, but it is still technically part of the SQL Server application and requires a license for use on that processor(s).
So yes, you can install it on another server.
Yes, you can install only the advanced services, but that still counts as full server., so it requires a full license.
Yes, you can install an Express Edition (with advanced services) on another server for free.
But... the express edition SSRS can't access a non-localhost database (technical limitations of express & web edition).
You can try to circumvent that with linked-servers, but you need to duplicate every used stored procedure, view, table etc., so it's an impractical mess.
The answer to your question is thus: Technically, yes - but actually NO, not without another license.
That extra-installation is gonna cost USD 1'000+ per month.
Yes, you can install SSRS and a SQL Server database on different servers. While the default installation tries to install both, you can select to install them separately.
MSDN links:
Considerations for Installing Reporting Services
Installing SQL Server Reporting Services
From MSDN article Considerations for Installing Reporting Services:
Select Database Engine Services in the Feature Selection page to host
the report server databases. Reporting Services requires a local or
remote instance of SQL Server 2005 or SQL Server 2008 Database Engine
to host the report server databases. If you install an instance of the
Database Engine concurrently with Reporting Services, you can
eliminate a post-Setup task by installing the default configuration,
which creates and configures the report server databases
automatically. In addition to hosting the report server databases, SQL
Server relational databases can also be a source of data for reports
and models.
You could install SSRS in a new server, but to do so you would need a new license for this other server.
From Microsoft SQL Server 2014 Licensing Guide:
"The software components of a single SQL Server 2014 license cannot be separated for use in more than one OSE. If these components are running on a server other than the main database server, then an additional license is required for each additional OSE in which they are installed. For example, if the SQL Server DB is deployed in one OSE and SQL Server RS is deployed in another, both OSEs must be fully licensed for SQL Server 2014 accordingly."
Link to download the guide:
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=230678
I'm in the process of looking for a dedicated server to host my soon to be released web apps. THey are build with ASP.NEt and uses Sql Server 2005. I've got a great deal with a company for a Intel Core2Quad Q9300 with 8Gb or ram and 750Gb sata.
They offer me Windows 2003 64 Standard or Windows 2008 64 Web for free, which one should I choose?
My main concern is about the database, in the first moment I'm going to have only one box to host both the web and database layer. Will I be able to install SQL Server (initially the express edition, then eventually the standard) on the Web version of Windows 2008?
If you can get Server 2008, i'd go with it because IIS7 is an excellent Upgrade to IIS6.
SQL Server Standard 2008 64-Bit is officially supported on Windows 2008 Web Server. SQL Server Enterprise 2008 64-Bit is NOT (not sure if it does work and is only not listed. 32-Bit Enterprise is listed, but running 32-Bit on a modern server does not sound appealing). See System Requirements here for a full list of SQL Server 2008 Editions and supported Servers.
Not sure about SQL Server 2005, there seems to be a patch needed.
You can run SQL Server on Server 2008 Web Edition (this is a change from Server 2003 Web Edition). The main limitations I am aware of between Web and Standard for 2008 is Web cannot do any kind of virtualization, Active Directory or DNS management, etc. It is intended to be essentially an application server.
I would recommend the newer OS, since it comes with IIS7 and the enhanced TCP/IP (among other things).
If its free, go for the standard version. Here is a comparison of the features:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/compare-features.aspx
I've never noticed any performance differences in the versions, so might as well get features you might use someday. Expensive to upgrade later.
You can run the SQL on either one.