Installing SQL 2005 on a Windows 2003 Terminal Server

[Paul Duncan]

I have found several Microsoft KB articles saying that SQL Server is not
supported on Windows Server 2003 Terminal Server application server (KB
327270).
This article appears to be specific to SQL Server Failover Clustering on
Microsoft Windows Server 2003-based server clusters where the Windows Server
2003-based server clusters have Terminal Server installed on the cluster.
Is there an official stance about installing SQL 2005 on a Terminal Server?
My experience has been that SQL significantly degrades performance when it
is installed on a TS.
Thanks!

 

[Vera Noest [MVP]]

Re: Installing SQL 2005 on a Windows 2003 Terminal Server

It's possible to install SQL2005 on a TS, but absolutely *not*
recommended. SQL and TS have very different resource requirements,
and the server must be tuned differently for these two roles.

_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

=?Utf-8?B?UGF1bCBEdW5jYW4=?=
<PaulDuncan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote on 24 sep 2008 in
microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> I have found several Microsoft KB articles saying that SQL
> Server is not supported on Windows Server 2003 Terminal Server
> application server (KB 327270).
> This article appears to be specific to SQL Server Failover
> Clustering on Microsoft Windows Server 2003-based server
> clusters where the Windows Server 2003-based server clusters
> have Terminal Server installed on the cluster. Is there an
> official stance about installing SQL 2005 on a Terminal Server?
> My experience has been that SQL significantly degrades
> performance when it is installed on a TS.
> Thanks!

 

[Jeff Pitsch]

Re: Installing SQL 2005 on a Windows 2003 Terminal Server

Plus I don't think it's actually documented anywhere outside of blogs.
It really boils down to plain common sense.

Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services

Vera Noest [MVP] wrote:
> It's possible to install SQL2005 on a TS, but absolutely *not*
> recommended. SQL and TS have very different resource requirements,
> and the server must be tuned differently for these two roles.
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Vera Noest
> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
>
> =?Utf-8?B?UGF1bCBEdW5jYW4=?=
> <PaulDuncan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote on 24 sep 2008 in
> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:
>
>> I have found several Microsoft KB articles saying that SQL
>> Server is not supported on Windows Server 2003 Terminal Server
>> application server (KB 327270).
>> This article appears to be specific to SQL Server Failover
>> Clustering on Microsoft Windows Server 2003-based server
>> clusters where the Windows Server 2003-based server clusters
>> have Terminal Server installed on the cluster. Is there an
>> official stance about installing SQL 2005 on a Terminal Server?
>> My experience has been that SQL significantly degrades
>> performance when it is installed on a TS.
>> Thanks!

 

[Paul Duncan]

Re: Installing SQL 2005 on a Windows 2003 Terminal Server

Thanks for the responses. I agree that it is common sense to NOT impose this
on a TS. Unfortunately, the task of convincing decision makers to use common
sense on the matter is a uphill battle. Thus, having an official documented
position to point to would be valuable.

"Jeff Pitsch" wrote:

> Plus I don't think it's actually documented anywhere outside of blogs.
> It really boils down to plain common sense.
>
> Jeff Pitsch
> Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services
>
> Vera Noest [MVP] wrote:
> > It's possible to install SQL2005 on a TS, but absolutely *not*
> > recommended. SQL and TS have very different resource requirements,
> > and the server must be tuned differently for these two roles.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________
> > Vera Noest
> > MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> > TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
> > ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
> >
> > =?Utf-8?B?UGF1bCBEdW5jYW4=?=
> > <PaulDuncan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote on 24 sep 2008 in
> > microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:
> >
> >> I have found several Microsoft KB articles saying that SQL
> >> Server is not supported on Windows Server 2003 Terminal Server
> >> application server (KB 327270).
> >> This article appears to be specific to SQL Server Failover
> >> Clustering on Microsoft Windows Server 2003-based server
> >> clusters where the Windows Server 2003-based server clusters
> >> have Terminal Server installed on the cluster. Is there an
> >> official stance about installing SQL 2005 on a Terminal Server?
> >> My experience has been that SQL significantly degrades
> >> performance when it is installed on a TS.
> >> Thanks!
>

 

[TP]

Re: Installing SQL 2005 on a Windows 2003 Terminal Server

Hi,

It depends on the needs of the particular situation. If you are asking
if it is recommended to install an instance of SQL Server that will
support hundreds of concurrent users with database sizes several
hundred gigabytes to terabytes, then the answer is no.

Only you know the specifications of the server, the number of users
that will use TS, the applications and the load they impose, the
security/uptime requirements of the organization, the memory, cpu,
hard drive and i/o requirements of sql server in this specific use case,
the queries that normally run, etc.

There is no one answer that works for every situation without knowing
all the facts. There are literally tons of cases where running multiple
roles on the same server is a perfectly reasonable business decision,
however, there are also lots of cases where it makes the most sense
to have each server dedicated to a single function.

Think about it for a moment--if the advice of the experts in each
specialty (ts, exchange, sql, ad, web, erp, crm, etc.) was followed
blindly, even a small company with a handful of employees would run
ten or more servers. Or in today's world, perhaps they would be VMs
running on a server with multiple 6-core CPUs.

-TP

Paul Duncan wrote:
> I have found several Microsoft KB articles saying that SQL Server is
> not supported on Windows Server 2003 Terminal Server application
> server (KB 327270).
> This article appears to be specific to SQL Server Failover Clustering
> on Microsoft Windows Server 2003-based server clusters where the
> Windows Server 2003-based server clusters have Terminal Server
> installed on the cluster. Is there an official stance about
> installing SQL 2005 on a Terminal Server? My experience has been that
> SQL significantly degrades performance when it is installed on a TS.
> Thanks!