The End of SQL Server 2019
-
Comments posted to this topic are about the item The End of SQL Server 2019
-
Times flies, thanks for the reminder. Didn't switch yet to 2022
-
The bad part of me is whispering in my ear to try to nurse our SQL 2019 instances along until 5 years after the end of extended support...
So I can retire and leave the next upgrade for the next guy in my spot...
More likely by that time we'll have migrated some or most of the databases to cloud databases (finally)
-
-
We're being forced to upgrade from 2019 to 2022 with my biggest database, as the vendor will no longer support 2019 after their next upgrade which we'll put in later this year. It's unfortunate they couldn't have waited a year so we could have gone to 2025 a year from now... but then again, will 2025 be ready then?
For everything else, we'll stay on 2019 although we have a couple of 2022's in the mix.
-
After reading Connie's comment, I believe we're going to hold off on even thinking about any upgrades until next year at the soonest. The reason being, the applications our group hosts are all being evaluated to see if they can be "consolidated" into another application (and yes, there are applications we host that are very, very similar in functionality to other applications not hosted by us)
It's shaping up to be a very, very interesting year...
-
Why are we all marked as "Newbie" with 0 points?
- Connie wrote:
We're being forced to upgrade from 2019 to 2022 with my biggest database, as the vendor will no longer support 2019 after their next upgrade which we'll put in later this year. It's unfortunate they couldn't have waited a year so we could have gone to 2025 a year from now... but then again, will 2025 be ready then?
For everything else, we'll stay on 2019 although we have a couple of 2022's in the mix.
Interesting. Not often I see a vendor forcing the db to upgrade. That cost can really limit sales of their software.
- Tom Uellner wrote:
Why are we all marked as "Newbie" with 0 points?
no idea, ticket filed
- Steve Jones - SSC Editor wrote:Connie wrote:
We're being forced to upgrade from 2019 to 2022 with my biggest database, as the vendor will no longer support 2019 after their next upgrade which we'll put in later this year. It's unfortunate they couldn't have waited a year so we could have gone to 2025 a year from now... but then again, will 2025 be ready then?
For everything else, we'll stay on 2019 although we have a couple of 2022's in the mix.
Interesting. Not often I see a vendor forcing the db to upgrade. That cost can really limit sales of their software.
I work for a UK "blue light" employer, and this is the kind of thing that takes intense work to buy and implement, so it's usually around for a long time. We could stay on 2019, but it wouldn't be supported and that's just too risky for this particular application. For a different kind of system, say helpdesk ticketing or fleet management, we would not be so quick to upgrade.
-
Definitely don't want to be unsupported in many cases. Just interesting to see the requirement.
-
This is something I totally agree with too, Steve. And something I am constantly having to fight IT and others on, unfortunately. That is, just because something has gone out of "mainstream support", doesn't mean I have to upgrade. Like you said, it works totally fine for the purposes I'm using it, so why would I upgrade. And if there aren't any glaring security vulnerabilities for the feature set that I use, then again, why would I upgrade. If hackers haven't found a vulnerability yet, what are the odds they will find one later. As opposed to spending their time on the newer versions, which contain new features, that are more likely to have bugs and vulnerabilities.
So my argument is, I feel that if I were to upgrade, then there would be a HIGHER chance of there being a bug and/or a security vulnerability.
One rebuttal that our IT department responds with is, "Our insurance policy requires it." That sucks.
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply