I am performing a migration upgrading from 2008 to 2016 and the requirements are that the file paths need to stay exactly the same as they were, with same drive letters, paths, and folder names due to the application being so static. I don't foresee it taking that much work to do this manually but I feel there must be a better way to mirror the config exactly. I know there will be some differrnt things no matter what inherently from upgrading the instance, but if anyone has any answers that would be very useful.


  • 1
    Why does the application care about SQL Server's drive letters, paths, and folder names? The application should be connecting to the instance, the underlying physical implementation should be irrelevant - this abstraction is part of the reason we use a relational database instead of a bunch of files on disk. :-) – Aaron Bertrand Jan 23 '18 at 18:33
  • 1
    I have no control over this really, it is for a client project and this is what the client is asking for. It is their application so it is hard to say, we do not manage the app. This is simply what they are requesting and I have to comply. You do bring up a good point, though. I am just hoping to make this easier on myself once I get to it., – A. Nelson Jan 23 '18 at 18:34
  • Are you performing an in-place upgrade or are you moving the databases to a new instance of SQL Server? (Also, these are questions you can pass along to your client. Just because you don't know or don't have control doesn't mean it's impossible to convince them that they're asking for something that is unnecessary.) – Aaron Bertrand Jan 23 '18 at 18:35
  • Entirely new VM and fresh instance, just migrating the data in after installation. I agree with you, though. I am just in an unfortunate spot with this project, it has just been messy and a tight timeline is there, so we're a little beyond that. I already migrated and installed actually and they have since come out and asked for this to be done. – A. Nelson Jan 23 '18 at 18:36
  • Though I will say this question as a whole may be entirely pointless since this situation is not really a SQL problem and you are correct in everything you're saying, so why would an answer exist. I guess I don't see why this functionality would be necessary. – A. Nelson Jan 23 '18 at 18:38

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.