Ahead of the Game
-
Ahead of the Game
At least I thought I was ahead of things. Or maybe I'm way behind and just don't realize it.
While working on the Database Daily newsletter last week I noticed this KB article and it immediately caught my eye. I usually apply some editorial judgement to most articles, but the KB ones I just note for the week and don't read them too carefully, especially when they don't apply to the SQLServerCentral.com environment. In this case, 3 simple words stopped me.
"Service Pack 2".
I had to stop and go back and be sure it really said SQL Server 2005 thought I couldn't imagine a SQL Server 2000 SP2 article at this time. For a few minutes I sat there thinking, wondering if I've been so out of the production world and busy with my own writings that I'd missed the release of Service Pack 2. A quick search around Microsoft and Google showed I wasn't losing my mind and the Service Pack had not in fact been released.
But curiously there is already a fix out there for a problem when you install the Service Pack. It's interesting that this got released, although I guess they want to be sure their testers can get through the install. However I have a couple issues with this.
First I don't think there should be articles on Beta products in the official support area. This should be in some Beta area so it doesn't get confused with shipping products or get left out there if it's corrected. It would be too easy to forget to remove this and have it cause confusion later on.
The other big problem I have here is why can't anyone at Microsoft write an install program that doesn't depend on some path being there? I've had numerous service packs and hot fixs fail because I hadn't installed something on c:. Not we need to maintain the "log" folder? Why can't they just look for the log locations? It's not like this isn't stored somewhere in SQL Server.
C'mon Microsoft, you're better than this.
Steve Jones
-
Steve,
I wholeheartedly agree with you.
Another interesting note about SQL 2005 SP2 is that Windows Vista REQUIRES it.
Here is a link to a story about it.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2050368,00.asp
It is very interesting that Microsoft requires a version of SQL that is not released yet. This will have a big impact on our upgrade decisions.
-
As of this posting the KB article no longer exists !!!
RegardsRudy KomacsarSenior Database Administrator"Ave Caesar! - Morituri te salutamus."
-
Apparently someone's reading my editorial in the Northwest
-
How do you think you got promoted to MVP???
Someone in high places is reading you
.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply