April 7, 2011 at 12:33 pm
Is this a question of religion, where some folks say, "Never" and others say, "Why not?" I'm interested in the possible benefits and potential issues with installing Visual Studio on a production server.
Thanks in advance for you opinions.
Chris
April 8, 2011 at 12:35 am
Typically wouldnt install on a production box.
VS is a development environment and its results such as ssis packages can be deployed to wherever they need to be from the ide.
However all circumstances are unique and if your server isnt overloaded and you have minimal number of machines available then why not.
---------------------------------------------
If data can screw you, it will; never assume the data are correct.
April 8, 2011 at 12:48 pm
Thanks Kevin,
I am of the school where you wouldn't put any thing but server but the specific services necessary for its function, especially if you have a dev server; this is mostly because (and maybe this is old school) you don't know what performance hits, issues caused by local leaving local (VS0connections open (to the SQL Server), dll conflicts and other variables.
Also, when it comes to troubleshooting "OLE DB or OLE ODBC error" issues, etc., reported in the logs, the fewer variables in the server environment, the better.
That said, I've read that SQL Server installs (can install) VS on the server, which lead me to question my previosu position.
-Chris
April 9, 2011 at 8:36 am
When you say install Visual Studio, I am assuming you are referring to BIDS (B.I. Development Studio).
We typically do not install BIDS on production boxes, mainly because I don't want testing/debugging on production and also because installing/ applying service packs takes forever.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply