October 17, 2005 at 8:47 pm
David Campbell did a humorous top ten reasons to upgrade at the SQL PASS Summit last month in Dallas. It was slightly humorous, but being contrarians here, I decided that perhaps there are a few reasons not to upgrade. So here's my list:
10. Database Mirroring - OK it's a cheap shot, but this was one of those very highly looked for features.
9. SQL Server 2000 Works - That's a big one. If you run a production environment, stability is very, very valuable. And my SQL Server 2000 servers are pretty rock solid. While it's interesting to look at the new features, having something that works, and works well is a good reason to stick with it.
8. SQL Server 2000 is Supported - Yeah, I know that SQL Server 2005 will be supported, but moving forward and onward isn't necessary for those that are running SQL Server 2000. You've got support, patches, etc. for a few more years. Now if you're on SQL Server 7 ...
7. SQL Turbo - One of Dave Campbell's toungue in cheek references was to the time required to rebuild Full Text indicies. However if you use Quest's SQL Turbo, as we do, that's not an issue.
6. DTS - I know SSIS is cool. I've read lots of blogs, and many of the "gurus" think it's the bee's knees. But there were two big things that bug me about SSIS. One is licensing, no more redistributables. That won't bite too many people, but it does limit your scale out to your budget. The second thing is DTS is a very intuitive tool. SSIS isn't.
5. Time - Face it, most of us don't have time to get the things on our plates done each week. Who needs more testing of a new paradigm at the same time?
4. Budgets Upgrading is going to cost something. Most people will have lost Software Assurance by now, and the upgrades won't be cheap. Not like Oracle, but not costless either.
3. More Demos - Hey, we've seen some cool new demos. What's another yeat going to bring at TechEd, the PDC, and more importantly PASS. Wait until next November at the PASS Summit when all the Microsoft boys and girls will come up with some great new demos.
2. 1.0 - Face it, while SQL Server has been around a long time, there have really been 3 1.0 level releases. SQL Server 7 was basically a rewrite, not using any Sybase code, and lasted less than a couple years before SQL Server 2000, originally SQL Server 7.5, took it's place and cleaned up the 1.0 code. SQL Server 6.0 was also kind of a 1.0 release, substantially different from SQL Server 4.2x and lasted about 6 months. SQL Server 2005, with CLR integration, is that type of release. It's a lot of new code, not tweaked code, that is like a 1.0 release.
1. Pressue - The longer you wait, and the more of you that wait, the more pressed Microsoft will be to fix any issues quickly as well as provide more tools, enhancements, etc. Help build a better product, put more pressure on them!
I'm sure the Microsoft team will be sending the complaints to me when they read this, so I'm emptying my mailbox in preparation for the onslaught 🙂
Steve Jones
October 18, 2005 at 11:30 am
To me #9 is the single should be rated higher. If it ain't broke, why fix it!
Regards,
Scott
October 18, 2005 at 12:07 pm
Yikes!
"...The second thing is DTS is a very intuitive tool..."
Now I have to wonder how bad SSIS is. DTS is a great tool that seems to never have gotten past the alpha release stage. MS application development tools have a history of making things harder than they need to be (despite what all the microphiliacs think).
To me, everthing I've heard about SQL2005 screams for not upgrading: If you must move to it, then you're better off redesigning/revisioning what ever application you currently have on 2000. SQL7 & 2000 had suprisingly good backward compatibility, but there are just way too many differences with this new behemoth for us Charlie Browns to risk trusting Lucy (A.K.A. Bill) to hold that football steady--again.
October 18, 2005 at 12:09 pm
I don't think SSIS is bad, it's just complicated and not intuitive. It's really a programming tool now and less a quick and dirty tool. Not to say you can't make it that, but the learning curve is steep and I see lots of people getting in over their heads quickly.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply