0

(Apologies...I'm new to SQL Server...)

We have SQL Server 2012 Express installed as a default instance which is the data store for our scheduler (JAMS).

I have a small data entry project where SQL Server will be the back end. It will have a small number of users with minor traffic/data entry/edits throughout the day. The data volumes will be small: one table with 300K rows, 3 more with around 5K rows.

I'm wondering whether I should convert the default instance into two named instances to segregate the applications? Or perhaps it's not worth the bother? IIRC, named instances run separate services for each instance. So, I could say restart the data entry instance without affecting the scheduler instance.

High availability isn't really needed, but if I adversely affect the scheduler it wouldn't be good.

Your thoughts? Thanks...

Scott
  • 169
  • 1
  • 3
  • 14
  • duplicate: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7831137/changing-sql-server-named-instance-to-default-instance – Moslem Ben Dhaou Jun 29 '14 at 13:58
  • It's not a duplicate, it's the reverse of my question, and a thread I'd read before posting. Although further comments on named vs. default instances are welcome, as @Dan Guzman has done below. – Scott Jun 29 '14 at 22:39

1 Answers1

0

Named instances are required only when you want to run multiple instances. If you choose to run a single instance it doesn't really matter if it is named or default, although I would personally run as the default instance to avoid the need to specify the instance name.

The big advantage of a single instance is that it uses memory resources more efficiently (e.g. shared buffer pool memory). The downside, as you mentioned, is lack of isolation. Separate databases will help mitigate this concern but you will still be locked into the version supported by the vendor. For example, you can't use SQL 2014 until JAMS supports it. For this specific reason, I suggest you avoid sharing user and vendor databases on the same instance unless you are willing to be tied to the SQL Server versions supported by the vendor. Based on your description, I don't think resource utilization will be a concern so multiple instances is probably the best option if you want flexibility.

Dan Guzman
  • 43,250
  • 3
  • 46
  • 71