SQLServer 2005 reliability

[JulianUK]

Hi

I am trying to persuade the powers that be to upgrade our SS 2000 to 2005 for a major project.

One view that is holding things up is that it is generally "unstable", or at least unproven.

Is this baseless nonsense or not?

Julian

 

[vongrunt]

> Is this baseless nonsense or not?

I remember one company that left SQL7 ASAP when SQL2000 came out. And they jumped on user-defined functions (UDFs) like crazy. Code didn't scale well. So they used isolation level 0 (NOLOCK, READUNCOMMITTED) first at critical places, then everywhere. Problem was, early versions of SQL2000 had some nasty bugs in that area (SELECT over heap table or query covered by nonclustered index during concurrent writes). Result: no turning back, find (slow) workarounds and wait for M$ to release hotfix.

In other words: there is certain wisdom in being "conservative". For some people this means "wait for a service pack or two", for others "use new features carefully".

------
[small]select stuff(stuff(replicate('<P> <B> ', 14), 109, 0, '<.'), 112, 0, '/')[/small]

 

[JulianUK]

Hi vongrunt

That's fair enough I suppose. We just want to grab those new features and to hell with the consequences! But perhaps they are right.

What is likely to be the timescale for the first SP?