Yes, absolutely! Providing you have enough storage space to hold the data and there is enough horsepower in the server to handle the transactions the two databases' transactions. Regardless, two databases should not be a problem at all. Most places use one server with multiple databases on them-- it just makes sense with the cost of the licensing costs for a SQL Server. I've seen 30 or 40 databases on one server (most were low traffic/usage-- several hundred calls in a business day) and I'm certain there are bigger installations out there as well. Depending on the amount of horse power and RAM that you have you can host hundreds of databases on a single SQL Server. By default SQL Server ships with 4 databases already which are the system databases.

Yes, absolutely! Providing you have enough storage space to hold the data and there is enough horsepower in the server to handle the transactions the two databases' transactions. Regardless, two databases should not be a problem at all. Most places use one server with multiple databases on them-- it just makes sense with the cost of the licensing costs for a SQL Server. I've seen 30 or 40 databases on one server (most were low traffic/usage-- several hundred calls in a business day) and I'm certain there are bigger installations out there as well. Depending on the amount of horse power and RAM that you have you can host hundreds of databases on a single SQL Server. By default SQL Server ships with 4 databases already which are the system databases.