Are CNAME aliases for connection strings a good idea? To be very flexible and move database to different servers more easily, we came up with the idea of using an alias per database. So by simply changing a DNS entry, we can route all queries to a different database server without changing the connection string or re-deployment of the respective client application.

To clarify:

Per database we would have an alias. So if the database is moved to a different server, only its DNS alias has to be changed.

For example:


db1-alias.mydomain.com points to db1 on some random server.
db2-alias.mydomain.com points do db2 on some other random server.


So lets say db1 was moved from server1 to server2, there is no need to change the connection string. Only the DNS alias entry has to be changed, forwarding to server2 instead of server1.

Are there any known drawbacks to this?
One minor drawback would be that you would need to add a Subject Alternative Name (SAN) to the certificate that is bound to SQL Server if you are using encrypted connections.  This could be a significant pain if you have a "shared" server that hosts a number of smaller applications and you want to set up an alias for each application.

If you are using a separate alias for each application, you would need to generate and install a new certificate each time you add a new application to the server.  The same might apply if you want to make sure there are no unused/invalid SANs in the certificate, in that you would need a new certificate each time you removed an application.