May 12, 2009 at 6:30 am
Hi All
I would like some thoughts on the matter of SQL migration, we currently run SQL 2000 at the moment and just to justify the right version of SQL to upgrade to.
OS: Windows 2003 Enterprise
Business: OLTP billing/processing system with web front end and in house application constantly using the database.
SQL 2005 Standard edition: Sounds like the natural upgrade path, but the problem is that this is already 4.5 years old and from a business / IT justification perspective, this could be a problem as SQL 2008 is already out, knowledge on SQL 2005 is pretty good and there is a lot of support out there especially on this forum. I am also quite conversant with SQL 2005 as well. Also for sql 2005 standard on 2003 Enterprise, there isn’t much restrictions except if one is going to be using the really advanced features where unfortunately we are not going to be using eg online indexing, fast restore etc. standard support is being retired for SQL 2005 in 2010 and one can buy extended support for it.
SQL 2008 Standard: Still new even though SP 1 is already out, problem is that we are using standard version, it looks to me like standard on SQL 2008 doesn’t give as much as Standard in sql 2005 bar the new SQL 2008 features.
I have also looked at the new features on 2008 and in all honesty, they look good, but most of the nice useful ones are only available on enterprise and it doesn’t really justify the cost of upgrading. Also, Ms will be likely bringing a new version out in 2011/2012 2-3 years time.
I would like to get the views of other pros here.
May 12, 2009 at 6:45 am
Go to 2008. At this point there's no sense to upgrade to 2005. The prices of the two are the same.
If you were on 2005 I would suggest not upgrading unless there are killer features that you want, but if you're upgrading anyway there's no good reason to go to 2005 over 2008. They're not all that different in the core engine, testing will be required whichever way you go. 2008 is stable, there are no major breaking bugs that I've heard of and the couple nasty ones that have been picked up are fixed by SP1.
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
May 12, 2009 at 7:06 am
I'd agree with Gail.
Only circumstance that should prevent choosing 2008 over 2005 now is if third party vendors won't support 2008.
2008 was almost a replacement for sql2005 SP3 so is not revolutionarily different, and testing code against should not be much more difficult than against 2005. If you go straight to 2008, even if 2011 comes out you will save yourself the expense and hassle of one upgrade cycle.
SQL 2005 has mainstream support till 12/04/2011 and extended support till 12/04/2016 so you are covered till 2016 but only 2 years of mainstream support. 2008 has 33 months longer covered.
Personally for this round of upgrades I will be leaving 2005 servers where they are (just applying SP3) and leap frog SQL 2000 servers to 2008.
Point to note for DBAs - in 2008 service packs can be rolled back - about time!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
May 12, 2009 at 7:17 am
Regarding future editions, there will be a SQL 2008 R2 released sometime in 2010, first CTP later this year. It's not a complete new version, more a set of add-ons for various BI types.
http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/R2.aspx
As for the next version of SQL Server, I don't believe there have been any public announcements about when it's planned for.
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
May 12, 2009 at 7:38 am
Go with 2008. The improvements and enhancements to manageability in 2008 alone make it worth upgrading to.
Jonathan Kehayias | Principal Consultant | MCM: SQL Server 2008
My Blog | Twitter | MVP Profile
Training | Consulting | Become a SQLskills Insider
Troubleshooting SQL Server: A Guide for Accidental DBAs[/url]
May 12, 2009 at 10:33 am
Thanks for the information guys.
May 12, 2009 at 11:19 am
This is considered a late hit & piling on, but...
Go to 2008. That's what we're in the process of doing now. Skipping right over 2005. Based on product life cycles, the time to test applications, the time to migrate stuff, and the life expectancy of the products, all taken together, it just doesn't make any sense to go to 2005 now that 2008 is both available and somewhat seasoned. There may be some minor or specialized surprises lurking in the code, but there's no longer any major surprises waiting to happen. And we're already four years into the projected life of 2005. So that's that much sooner that you'll be out of maintstream support.
No, there just isn't any way to justify going to 2005. Go to 2008.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
May 12, 2009 at 11:22 am
If you can't sell the jump straight to 2008 to management, at least purchase the 2008 license which will allow you to run 2005 if they approve that. Then you don't lay out the additional money to upgrade to 2008 later on.
Jonathan Kehayias | Principal Consultant | MCM: SQL Server 2008
My Blog | Twitter | MVP Profile
Training | Consulting | Become a SQLskills Insider
Troubleshooting SQL Server: A Guide for Accidental DBAs[/url]
May 12, 2009 at 11:39 am
Thanks for the info, but whats the situation with windows 2003 server as this would become unsupported after some time as well, before what i was looking at was to move onto 2005 now, when windows 2008 server is more widely used, then put a case forward for sql 2008 & windows 2008 upgrade.
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply