Can SQL Server 2000 & 2005 Reporting Services live together?

Can SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services live on the same server with SQL
Server 2005 Reporting Servives?yes
with a named instance, both works fine on 1 of my server.
but RS2005 support RS2000 reports, so there is no real needs to keep the 2
versions.
An RS2000 developper can deploy reports to an RS2005 server without problem
or the developper can upgrade the RS2000 reports to the 2005 format easily.
"Steve W" <SteveW@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6AE78E82-2EC1-42FE-BFAA-771EEDF8CEF3@.microsoft.com...
> Can SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services live on the same server with SQL
> Server 2005 Reporting Servives?|||Yes, there is no REAL need to install both in a production server. The
concern as the OP expressed comes when you have to developed/support both
with your developing computer: due to various reasons, you may not have that
many test server available to install them seperately.
So, when you install the SQL Server2000 and 2005 as different named
instance, how the RS' virtue direcctories are organised? Hwen there is only
one of them, there would be http://serverName/Reports and
http://servername/reportServer. What happens if you install both? Does the
installation process prompt you to specify a desired virtue path, or does it
automatically create a different path, as you install different .NET
version? I really do not want to take any risk to mess up my two alreay
messy development boxes.
"Jeje" <willgart@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:umY5Y4ZdHHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> yes
> with a named instance, both works fine on 1 of my server.
> but RS2005 support RS2000 reports, so there is no real needs to keep the 2
> versions.
> An RS2000 developper can deploy reports to an RS2005 server without
> problem
> or the developper can upgrade the RS2000 reports to the 2005 format
> easily.
>
> "Steve W" <SteveW@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:6AE78E82-2EC1-42FE-BFAA-771EEDF8CEF3@.microsoft.com...
>> Can SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services live on the same server with SQL
>> Server 2005 Reporting Servives?
>|||when you install a named instance the default reportserver virtual directory
is:
http://server/reportserver$instancename
but using the RS configuration tool, you can create the reportserver virtual
directory you want.
You can quickly and easily manage this, not like in RS2000 where there is
no tool to do this job.
"Norman Yuan" <NotReal@.NotReal.not> wrote in message
news:uT%23rqafdHHA.1216@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Yes, there is no REAL need to install both in a production server. The
> concern as the OP expressed comes when you have to developed/support both
> with your developing computer: due to various reasons, you may not have
> that many test server available to install them seperately.
> So, when you install the SQL Server2000 and 2005 as different named
> instance, how the RS' virtue direcctories are organised? Hwen there is
> only one of them, there would be http://serverName/Reports and
> http://servername/reportServer. What happens if you install both? Does the
> installation process prompt you to specify a desired virtue path, or does
> it automatically create a different path, as you install different .NET
> version? I really do not want to take any risk to mess up my two alreay
> messy development boxes.
> "Jeje" <willgart@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:umY5Y4ZdHHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> yes
>> with a named instance, both works fine on 1 of my server.
>> but RS2005 support RS2000 reports, so there is no real needs to keep the
>> 2 versions.
>> An RS2000 developper can deploy reports to an RS2005 server without
>> problem
>> or the developper can upgrade the RS2000 reports to the 2005 format
>> easily.
>>
>> "Steve W" <SteveW@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:6AE78E82-2EC1-42FE-BFAA-771EEDF8CEF3@.microsoft.com...
>> Can SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services live on the same server with SQL
>> Server 2005 Reporting Servives?
>|||Thanks to the info.
"Jeje" <willgart@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OkVspxfdHHA.2088@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> when you install a named instance the default reportserver virtual
> directory is:
> http://server/reportserver$instancename
> but using the RS configuration tool, you can create the reportserver
> virtual directory you want.
> You can quickly and easily manage this, not like in RS2000 where there is
> no tool to do this job.
> "Norman Yuan" <NotReal@.NotReal.not> wrote in message
> news:uT%23rqafdHHA.1216@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Yes, there is no REAL need to install both in a production server. The
>> concern as the OP expressed comes when you have to developed/support both
>> with your developing computer: due to various reasons, you may not have
>> that many test server available to install them seperately.
>> So, when you install the SQL Server2000 and 2005 as different named
>> instance, how the RS' virtue direcctories are organised? Hwen there is
>> only one of them, there would be http://serverName/Reports and
>> http://servername/reportServer. What happens if you install both? Does
>> the installation process prompt you to specify a desired virtue path, or
>> does it automatically create a different path, as you install different
>> .NET version? I really do not want to take any risk to mess up my two
>> alreay messy development boxes.
>> "Jeje" <willgart@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:umY5Y4ZdHHA.1244@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> yes
>> with a named instance, both works fine on 1 of my server.
>> but RS2005 support RS2000 reports, so there is no real needs to keep the
>> 2 versions.
>> An RS2000 developper can deploy reports to an RS2005 server without
>> problem
>> or the developper can upgrade the RS2000 reports to the 2005 format
>> easily.
>>
>> "Steve W" <SteveW@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:6AE78E82-2EC1-42FE-BFAA-771EEDF8CEF3@.microsoft.com...
>> Can SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services live on the same server with SQL
>> Server 2005 Reporting Servives?
>>
>