Recently, we have migrated a business application database to Amazon AWS SQL Server RDS. We have loved the flexibility of backup and scaling with the cloudified database, but we have need for writing reports for our gathered analytics data. Our in house data analyst is most comfortable using SQL Reporting Services. Normally, this is installed as a component with the SQL Server install, but we obviously do not have that option on RDS.
My question is, has anyone been able to successfully deploy and use SQL Reporting services with Amazon RDS?
What I have tried:
I attempted to spin up another EC2 instance, install "SQL Server Express with Advanced Services", and point SSRS to RDS, but it said that I had incompatible license types.
I plan on contacting the AWS team directly for this as well, but I thought that I would reach out to SO first to see if anyone has run into this. Thanks.
You might need to use a certain Microsoft-created "Amazon Machine Image", specifically the "SQL Server Optimized" AMI: Microsoft AMIs.
Another option would be to apply SQL Server SSRS containers, hosted on an EC2 VM, connected to RDS. There's a blog on Windocks.com that outlines steps to deliver configured containers for improved scalability (multiple SSRS containers), with simplified management.
I have successfully ran SSRS in Docker containers on Windows ECS/2 VMs for a while and just today came across a fresh out of the oven announcement from Amazon on running SSRS natively on RDS: https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2020/05/amazon-rds-for-sql-server-now-supports-sql-server-reporting-services/?nc1=h_ls
Related
I have been looking around for the best practices when setting up Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS) in AWS(Amazon Web Services) environment. We have two options
SSRS on EC2: We can launch an EC2 instance with SQL Server installed on it and then we can setup SSRS using Report Server Configuration Manager.
SSRS on RDS: We can add an option group for SSRS in RDS and that will enable the SSRS on RDS instance. We can set the limit of max memory % usage for SSRS while setting up SSRS option in RDS
I am looking for comparison between SSRS on EC2 vs SSRS on RDS in terms of security, performance or any other limitations/benefits of using any of these two options.
The entire reason AWS strived to provide SSRS support is due to the cries from Dev's.
I shouldn't take all the credit as MSFT China Support helped me get it going, manually automagically setting up SSRS on an EC2 prior to RDS offering the service.
Here is the script I wrote and if you take a look it's worth paying for the RDS service. If there is only one reason you go SSRS RDS, it's ease of use.
Before you read this answer, keep in mind I have SQL Reporting Server baked into an Amazon Machine Image (AMI). I can't have an Auto Scale Group (ASG) with a server that requires a 45minute install in its UserData (Bootstrap script).
Hence I have a pre-installed SSRS image and then restore the Reporting Config database over the top during the deployment. Here are the issues with that:
RSConfig generates a Dsn Connection String doesn't work
Resort to what I did if there's a blocker, take it as a Plan B. I've walked the path before...
Currently I have got an AWS EC2 windows server machine along with SQL Server Web Edition.
In order to reduce costs, I want to get rid of SQL server web edition and put express edition on the same machine.
Can I do it? I was thinking of uninstalling web edition and then installing express edition on the same server. Will this suffice?
Any insights would be highly appreciated.
P.S. I do not have support plan with AWS, and that is why I am writing here on Stackoverflow.
Thanks.
No.
The price for the instance is determined by the AMI that was used when launching the instance. Even if you uninstall SQL Server, you will still be charged the same hourly charge.
You will need to launch a new instance with the desired version. You'll also need to migrate the data and any other software you have installed on the instance.
It's probably a good time to consider using Amazon RDS, which is a fully-managed database service that can keep the database separate from your other sofware.
Has anyone on this forum, deployed SSRS in Scale-Out deployment? Having 2 SSRS instances on different machines connect to one database?
I am trying to deploy 2 SSRS server loadbalanced to connect to one database which is hosted on SQL-Always On cluster.
However while configuring the reporting services, I do not find the 2nd server waiting to join the Scale-out deployment as mentioned in the Microsoft site -
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms159114(v=sql.120).aspx
Fixed it Myself - It seems like you need to have the different instance names to make the scale out deployment work. You cannot have all the servers in scaleout deployment use default instances which is what I was doing. I installed another named instance on one server and I was able to join it to the scale-out deployment.
Reading some conflicting answers from Google searches, not sure if the answer is Yes, No, or maybe.
I thought it was pretty clear when reading this:
Amazon RDS currently does not support the following SQL Server features:
The ability to run Reporting, Analysis, Integration, or Master Data Services on the same server as the DB instance. If you need to do this, we recommend that you either install SQL Server on an EC2 instance or use an on-premise SQL Server instance to act as the Reporting, Analysis, Integration, or Master Data Services server.
Amazon now supports SSIS on RDS as of May 2020.
More info here
I have a SQL box and a web box; the SQL box is close to capacity. I'd like to install reporting services and thought about installing it on a SQL instance i would install on the web box, and only use that instance for reporting services. Is this a good option? What pitfalls will I have if I try to do this?
It's recommended to not mix IIS and SQL on the same box. Because 0f different access patterns and security at least.
The fact your SQL box is close to capacity should set alarm bells ringing and big red flags waving. The Report Server databases are quite small, and I'd lie awake at night if I thought it would overload my your DB server
SO: Should SQL Server be on the same machine as your IIS installation?
If you just install the Reporting Services (SSRS) web piece this should be fine. SSRS comes in 2 sections, the web piece and the database catalog so you could have a web site run on the web server and the catalog database would live on you normal database server. You will need to manually configure SSRS through the SSRS configuration utility and specify the remote server name during the database set up.
The downside of this is that you would be required to purchase an additional SQL license for the web server, since an SSRS installation counts as a SQL instance, but you should be able to use a standard edition license to for both instances.
I didn't find a lot a great resources but the steps would be like this:
--install just SSRS (and Client tools to debug connection issues) on the web server
--run the SSRS configuration tool and configure the app pools, virtual directories
--in the same config tool in the database section just specify the remote SQL server and select "create database" and it will create the database for you and apply the permissions needed to the database instance.
One thing I have found to be kind of quirky about the SQL 2005 SSRS config tool is that you have to "apply" changes when it doesn't seem that intuitive, so beware.
Here's an OK link:
http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mssql/article.php/3573361/SQL-2005-Reporting-Services-Part-1.htm