SQL 2000 SP5?

  • I encountered a problem mentioned in this KB http://support.microsoft.com/kb/909089/en-us.

    KB says "...This hotfix may receive additional testing. Therefore, if you are not severely affected by this problem, we recommend that you wait for the next SQL Server 2000 service pack that contains this hotfix."

    My server is SQL 2000 2162(SP4) already. So should I expect SP5 to come for this? Is SP5 on the way?

    Thanks,

    Vivien

  • But MS recommends applying service pack. It supposed to be SP5 then. I rememeber (maybe wrong) there is no service pack after SP4.

  • I questioned this with PSS many months ago and was told that maintenance for SQL Server 2000 has been stabilised and ther are no plans to issue a further hotfix rollup or service pack.

    M$ plans may change but for now Hotfix rollup build 2187 is likely to be the last that we get. There are very few public fixes for SQL Server 2000 at a higher build than 2187.

    Original author: https://github.com/SQL-FineBuild/Common/wiki/ 1-click install and best practice configuration of SQL Server 2019, 2017 2016, 2014, 2012, 2008 R2, 2008 and 2005.

    When I give food to the poor they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor they call me a communist - Archbishop Hélder Câmara

  • MS won't release SP5 for SQL2k since official support for SQL server 2000 will be ended by mid of 2008.

  • I use this handy guide from the good folks at SQLSecurity.com to keep myself up to date on SQL Server patches.

    SQL Server Version Database

    http://www.sqlsecurity.com/FAQs/SQLServerVersionDatabase/tabid/63/Default.aspx

    Description from the page:

    "This is a database of SQL Server versions for those of us who want to know what possible vulnerabilities may exist in unpatched SQL Server systems. This makes it easier for those of us tasked with securing those environments to prepare the proper documentation outlining the threat. Special thanks to Ken Klaft for helping maintain this area of the site. With the seamingly endless stream of PSS-only releases out there this gets to be really time-consuming.

    --Chip"

    "Key"
    MCITP: DBA, MCSE, MCTS: SQL 2005, OCP

  • Thank Damon. It is a very handy resouce.

    I am wondering whether M$ should have this kind of webpage rather than the other creates for M$.

  • Vivien,

    Since I can never have enough information ...

    Checking again for "official" MS KB articles yields:

    How to identify your SQL Server version and edition

    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/321185

    Syntax is given for determining SQL Server version information (including syntax) for 2005, 2000, 7.0, and 6.5 respectively. There is also a selective list of version numbers, but nothing as detailed as the list on SQLSecurity.com.

    There is another MS KB Article which gives information for SQL Server 2005 from build Build 09.00.3152 to Build 09.00.3195 (as of the time of writing this posting).

    The SQL Server 2005 builds that were released after SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 was released

    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/937137/

    My assumption is that Microsoft will keep a KB Article for the most recent version of SQL on the market. I agree that all of this information in one place would be good for those that have mixed SQL version environments.

    "Key"
    MCITP: DBA, MCSE, MCTS: SQL 2005, OCP

  • vidhya sagar (10/28/2007)


    MS won't release SP5 for SQL2k since official support for SQL server 2000 will be ended by mid of 2008.

    To clarify, MS will not be releasing any new sql 2000 hotfixes past the middle of 2008, but will still provide support for sp4 til 2013.

    __________________________________________________________________________________
    SQL Server 2016 Columnstore Index Enhancements - System Views for Disk-Based Tables[/url]
    Persisting SQL Server Index-Usage Statistics with MERGE[/url]
    Turbocharge Your Database Maintenance With Service Broker: Part 2[/url]

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply