Tables in the SQL Server "master" database, will they cause problems?
- by pepoluan
Folks, please be kind on me... I'm just an 'accidental' DBA due to our DBA resigned, so I'm totally a newbie in DBA...
You see, I have this application, "ESET Remote Administration Server" (ERAS) that stores its logs and analysis on (originally) a local Access database.
The decision was to migrate its database to a SQL Server 2008 R2 machine.
ESET (the maker of the software) helpfully provided tools to perform such migration; unfortunately, being the DBA neophyte that I am, I didn't realize that I have to first create my own database (on the SQL Server side) and assign that database as the 'default' database for ERAS' ODBC connection.
Now, the migration tool had successfully created a whole bunch of tables inside the "master" database.
My questions:
Should I leave things be as it is, or should I re-migrate the ERAS database to a different database?
If you suggest me perform a re-migration, my plan is to (1) create a new instance, (2) create a new database within the new instance, (3) create a new ODBC System DSN on the ERAS server pointing to the new DB in step 2, (4) use ESET's migration tool to migrate from the current DSN to the new DSN.
Do you think I missed a step there?
Thanks beforehand for any guidance.