June 4, 2015 at 12:57 pm
GilaMonster (6/4/2015)
Lynn Pettis (6/4/2015)
Alvin Ramard (6/4/2015)
Jeff Moden (6/4/2015)
Shifting gears a bit...Have any of you ever used a CTP of SQL Server to power your real production databases? Personally, I think such a thing would be insane.
I haven't heard of anybody doing that, well, sort of. I believe Barnes Noble went live with a pre-production version of SQL 2005. They just couldn't wait for the production version to come out.
It is my understanding that there are a few companies out there that are bleeding edge enough to be using pre public versions of SQL Server for production systems. They have a MS engineer usually on site to help trouble shoot issues and I am sure these companies have fairly deep pockets to pay for the support.
Yup, it's called the TAP program. Companies run pre-release versions, often versions that aren't public and have direct access to lots of support at MS to do so.
However, unless a company is in the TAP program, it's a license violation to use pre-release versions in prod.
Also, the TAP license is a bit different than CTP public download. They are not constrained by the expiration.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
June 4, 2015 at 12:58 pm
Luis Cazares (6/4/2015)
Ed Wagner (6/4/2015)
rodjkidd (6/4/2015)
Lynn Pettis (6/4/2015)
Alvin Ramard (6/4/2015)
Jeff Moden (6/4/2015)
Shifting gears a bit...Have any of you ever used a CTP of SQL Server to power your real production databases? Personally, I think such a thing would be insane.
I haven't heard of anybody doing that, well, sort of. I believe Barnes Noble went live with a pre-production version of SQL 2005. They just couldn't wait for the production version to come out.
It is my understanding that there are a few companies out there that are bleeding edge enough to be using pre public versions of SQL Server for production systems. They have a MS engineer usually on site to help trouble shoot issues and I am sure these companies have fairly deep pockets to pay for the support.
Years and years ago I was interviewed by an insurance company who did this. But yes top tier MS support etc. Not for the faint hearted.
Rodders...
I would never even consider it. Then again, I'm slightly paranoid and value stability and reliability over having the newest, shiniest toys to play with. Hmmm...I hope that doesn't mean I'm getting old and stolid. 😛
Maybe you'd want to play with the shiniest toys, but wouldn't let them go into production.
Touche, my friend. Yes, I'd like to play, but production is definitely different.
June 4, 2015 at 1:02 pm
GilaMonster (6/4/2015)
And, back on topic, can anyone help our poor, out-of-his-depth friend with locating a time machine?http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1691611-391-1.aspx
Let's see if that helps at all. No Time machine but something to help with ounce of prevention.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
June 4, 2015 at 1:07 pm
GilaMonster (6/4/2015)
And, back on topic, can anyone help our poor, out-of-his-depth friend with locating a time machine?http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1691611-391-1.aspx
I'll give it a shot, but I don't know if I'm going to make much headway. I think there's a fundamental lack of understanding and resistance to learning that I don't know if I can overcome.
June 4, 2015 at 1:21 pm
Ed Wagner (6/4/2015)
I think there's a fundamental lack of understanding and resistance to learning that I don't know if I can overcome.
He's borderline on my blacklist because of that. Feel like I'm beating my head against a wall.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
June 4, 2015 at 1:31 pm
GilaMonster (6/4/2015)
Ed Wagner (6/4/2015)
I think there's a fundamental lack of understanding and resistance to learning that I don't know if I can overcome.He's borderline on my blacklist because of that. Feel like I'm beating my head against a wall.
I make an honest effort to patient and I try not to be pessimistic. I really do try, but I know I don't always succeed. I think the only individual I've actually lost patience with is now banned (or psuedo-banned) and that had nothing to do with anything technical.
I also have to admit to myself that some individuals don't want to learn anything. They just want a ready-made solution that they can copy/paste and be a hero at work or school. The problem is that they don't understand what they're pasting and that's frustrating to me because I enjoy learning new things.
June 4, 2015 at 1:45 pm
Alvin Ramard (6/4/2015)
Eirikur Eiriksson (6/4/2015)
Jeff Moden (6/4/2015)
Shifting gears a bit...Have any of you ever used a CTP of SQL Server to power your real production databases? Personally, I think such a thing would be insane.
In Russia there is a rulette game that's about the same:unsure:
😎
The Russian game has a 5 in 6 chance of survival. Not sure how that compares with using CTP.
This is the politically corrected version, not a revolver but a Makarov (PM, Pistolet Makarova) with the 9th round in the chamber:unsure: In short, a no win situation.
😎
June 4, 2015 at 3:10 pm
SQLRNNR (6/4/2015)
GilaMonster (6/4/2015)
Lynn Pettis (6/4/2015)
Alvin Ramard (6/4/2015)
Jeff Moden (6/4/2015)
Shifting gears a bit...Have any of you ever used a CTP of SQL Server to power your real production databases? Personally, I think such a thing would be insane.
I haven't heard of anybody doing that, well, sort of. I believe Barnes Noble went live with a pre-production version of SQL 2005. They just couldn't wait for the production version to come out.
It is my understanding that there are a few companies out there that are bleeding edge enough to be using pre public versions of SQL Server for production systems. They have a MS engineer usually on site to help trouble shoot issues and I am sure these companies have fairly deep pockets to pay for the support.
Yup, it's called the TAP program. Companies run pre-release versions, often versions that aren't public and have direct access to lots of support at MS to do so.
However, unless a company is in the TAP program, it's a license violation to use pre-release versions in prod.
Also, the TAP license is a bit different than CTP public download. They are not constrained by the expiration.
I can't remember who they were. But 24/7 3 call centres / IT support around the world so no one was working un sociable hours. Competitive edge. Etc. Part of TAP or what ever it as called back then - They were running NT5 - if that helps place the year... So it hadn't even been rebranded Windows Server 2000 by then. So I guess pre-release SQL 2000 to go with it. Sounded both interesting and scary as hell 😉 Probably glad I didn't get the job.
Rodders...
June 5, 2015 at 2:21 am
rodjkidd (6/4/2015)
SQLRNNR (6/4/2015)
GilaMonster (6/4/2015)
Lynn Pettis (6/4/2015)
Alvin Ramard (6/4/2015)
Jeff Moden (6/4/2015)
Shifting gears a bit...Have any of you ever used a CTP of SQL Server to power your real production databases? Personally, I think such a thing would be insane.
I haven't heard of anybody doing that, well, sort of. I believe Barnes Noble went live with a pre-production version of SQL 2005. They just couldn't wait for the production version to come out.
It is my understanding that there are a few companies out there that are bleeding edge enough to be using pre public versions of SQL Server for production systems. They have a MS engineer usually on site to help trouble shoot issues and I am sure these companies have fairly deep pockets to pay for the support.
Yup, it's called the TAP program. Companies run pre-release versions, often versions that aren't public and have direct access to lots of support at MS to do so.
However, unless a company is in the TAP program, it's a license violation to use pre-release versions in prod.
Also, the TAP license is a bit different than CTP public download. They are not constrained by the expiration.
I can't remember who they were. But 24/7 3 call centres / IT support around the world so no one was working un sociable hours. Competitive edge. Etc. Part of TAP or what ever it as called back then - They were running NT5 - if that helps place the year... So it hadn't even been rebranded Windows Server 2000 by then. So I guess pre-release SQL 2000 to go with it. Sounded both interesting and scary as hell 😉 Probably glad I didn't get the job.
Rodders...
AFAIK StackExchange adopted SQL Server 2014 while still in CTP. Brent Ozar helped them with the migration.
It was quite a succesful case study.
-- Gianluca Sartori
June 5, 2015 at 9:35 am
Jeff Moden (6/4/2015)
Shifting gears a bit...Have any of you ever used a CTP of SQL Server to power your real production databases? Personally, I think such a thing would be insane.
If you listen to the MS marketing hype, there was a casino using SQL 2014 and In-Memory OLTP in production for quite a while before it want RTM. Before CTP even.
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
June 5, 2015 at 10:14 am
WayneS (6/5/2015)
Jeff Moden (6/4/2015)
Shifting gears a bit...Have any of you ever used a CTP of SQL Server to power your real production databases? Personally, I think such a thing would be insane.
If you listen to the MS marketing hype, there was a casino using SQL 2014 and In-Memory OLTP in production for quite a while before it want RTM. Before CTP even.
I don't having visited the IT departments for a bunch of casinos. Very paranoid about things like that in general.
Also, if you believe the marketing hype - 2005 Mirroring was able to do what AG can do now. And the fire departments in France were using Mirroring in the way that AG now works - prior to CTP. At least that's what was in their demos pre-product launch.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
June 5, 2015 at 9:31 pm
Alan.B (6/3/2015)
TomThomson (6/3/2015)
Luis Cazares (6/3/2015)
Eirikur Eiriksson (6/3/2015)
SQLRNNR (6/3/2015)
Lynn Pettis (6/2/2015)
SMH...Why would the person who wrote the procedure ask on a public forum why his procedure is returning a value of -6 when executed?
Just tell the OP that he needs to whip the cream longer!
My guess is that the OP doesn't have the ability to "read" the code, if he did he wouldn't have asked in the first place.
😎
BTW: probably a negated authentication failed error number (6)
The fun part is that the OP wrote the code. But maybe, he's able to write code but he's not able to read it. :hehe:
If you think that's strange you clearly have no experience of security designed by public servants (aka government bureaucrats).
I'm sure the really, really sensitive stuff (such as the IRS systems) are very secure.:hehe:
Yes, the UK Inland Revenue's system is pretty secure. However I wasn't cleared to retain copies (or see anyone else's copies) of some of the reports I had written for another very secure department, and I suspect if I had written code instead of just reports for them the same would have applied to the code. I also had problems with yet another government department when my boss wanted me to assign a particular person to a project and my boss apparently wasn't cleared to know that I couldn't assign that person to that project because that person didn't have the clearance required for the project (problem eventually solved by the boss either getting clearance to know who was/wasn't cleared, or already having it and putting a bomb under the person who was claiming he hadn't, but things were a bit fraught for a few days). And all the clearances involved in any of this were pretty low level, not even requiring positive vetting.
Tom
June 8, 2015 at 5:34 am
TomThomson (6/5/2015)
Alan.B (6/3/2015)
TomThomson (6/3/2015)
Luis Cazares (6/3/2015)
Eirikur Eiriksson (6/3/2015)
SQLRNNR (6/3/2015)
Lynn Pettis (6/2/2015)
SMH...Why would the person who wrote the procedure ask on a public forum why his procedure is returning a value of -6 when executed?
Just tell the OP that he needs to whip the cream longer!
My guess is that the OP doesn't have the ability to "read" the code, if he did he wouldn't have asked in the first place.
😎
BTW: probably a negated authentication failed error number (6)
The fun part is that the OP wrote the code. But maybe, he's able to write code but he's not able to read it. :hehe:
If you think that's strange you clearly have no experience of security designed by public servants (aka government bureaucrats).
I'm sure the really, really sensitive stuff (such as the IRS systems) are very secure.:hehe:
Yes, the UK Inland Revenue's system is pretty secure. However I wasn't cleared to retain copies (or see anyone else's copies) of some of the reports I had written for another very secure department, and I suspect if I had written code instead of just reports for them the same would have applied to the code. I also had problems with yet another government department when my boss wanted me to assign a particular person to a project and my boss apparently wasn't cleared to know that I couldn't assign that person to that project because that person didn't have the clearance required for the project (problem eventually solved by the boss either getting clearance to know who was/wasn't cleared, or already having it and putting a bomb under the person who was claiming he hadn't, but things were a bit fraught for a few days). And all the clearances involved in any of this were pretty low level, not even requiring positive vetting.
Now that sounds like an interesting one to deal with. You can't tell your boss that you can't assign a report to someone because the boss isn't cleared to know who's cleared. I'm so thankful I don't work in government.
June 8, 2015 at 8:41 am
Ed Wagner (6/8/2015)
Now that sounds like an interesting one to deal with. You can't tell your boss that you can't assign a report to someone because the boss isn't cleared to know who's cleared. I'm so thankful I don't work in government.
I wasn't working in government - just working for a manufacturer on a project to build a system for a government department that required clearance for everyone working on designe and build of the particular system.
Tom
June 8, 2015 at 10:42 am
TomThomson (6/8/2015)
Ed Wagner (6/8/2015)
Now that sounds like an interesting one to deal with. You can't tell your boss that you can't assign a report to someone because the boss isn't cleared to know who's cleared. I'm so thankful I don't work in government.I wasn't working in government - just working for a manufacturer on a project to build a system for a government department that required clearance for everyone working on designe and build of the particular system.
I know a guy who worked for the US National Security Agency. They couldn't discuss anything about what they were working on with anyone, including their boss. He couldn't get help or advice from anyone. He reported to a guy in charge of a particular part of the project, but had no knowledge of any other parts. BTW, that was not his boss. It made annual reviews interesting. I'm glad I don't have to deal with that level of bureaucracy.
Viewing 15 posts - 48,811 through 48,825 (of 66,712 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply