No XP, but Look Forward To 7
I heard that Windows XP Sales will end June 30, except for some low end PCs that can't handle Vista. This means that that most of us won't be able to buy XP on a decent laptop and don't look for drivers to continue to come out. I'm saddened by this, not thrilled with Vista, and guess I'm stuck with it for now if I get any new hardware.
But not for long, Bill Gates hinted that Windows 7 will release sometime in the next year or so. It seems like that's really quick, but with all the complaints and problems with Vista adoption, I wouldn't be surprised to see a Windows 7 in 2009. Microsoft needs to recover from the black eye of Vista, which I think has been received more poorly than any other new version.
And with Apple doing well, even gaining market share in some businesses, Windows needs some improvements quickly.
I think this is more a marketing move than anything, and I won't get my hopes up. My guess is we'll get some type of CTP in 2009, but likely still an OS coming in late 2010 or 2011.
SSD for Laptops?
An interesting blog on Solid State Drive (SSD) performance as compared to a desktop and servers. The post shows that in random reads, which SQL Server can do a lot of, that the drive shines, but in writes, it lags behind.
It's not a formal test, but it does make me rethink whether we'll see SSD in servers anytime soon. It might make more sense to have split arrays, some on SSD, some on regular hard drives, using the SSDs in certain places to get performance increases rather than just putting all your data on an SSD. Perhaps a Reporting Services or Analysis Services database would make more sense for SSDs.
Consistency
An interesting blog from Aaron Bertrand on consistency. Apparently the new Policy Based Management coming in SQL Server 2008 uses T-SQL-like syntax, despite using functions that look like T-SQL. So with something like DATEADD, a T-SQL function, you need different syntax in PBM. Now this is a Management Studio tool, one that DBAs will use, so I think Aaron has a good point. How confusing will this get for DBAs?
I understand why it's different, but to me that's just an excuse. I know you have deadlines, but if that's the case, then use a different function. I'm not sure why it's so important for this to be a T-SQL function if it's not a T-SQL function at the expense of consistency.
It sounds like poor design and programming to me.
Steve Jones
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.
April Fools - This past week was April 1, and we ran some fun stories and found a few more. In case you missed them: The New SQL OS, Database Wars Coming for the XBOX 360, Don't Know tops IT's to-do list , and Google to acquire U.S. government: What this means for IT |
|---|
The Voice of the DBA Podcasts
The podcast feeds are now available at sqlservercentral.podshow.com to get better bandwidth and maybe a little more exposure :). Comments are definitely appreciated and wanted, and you can get feeds from there.
or now on iTunes!
- Windows Media Podcast - MB WMV
- iPod Video Podcast - MB MP4
- MP3 Audio Podcast - MB
Today's podcast features music by Incompetech. Kevin Macleod has some great compositions in all genres of music. Check him out at www.incompetech.com.
I really appreciate and value feedback on the podcasts. Let us know what you like, don't like, or even send in ideas for the show. If you'd like to comment, post something here. The boss will be sure to read it.