Slashdot Mirror
MSSQL 2005 Finally Released
mnovotny writes "Computerworld reports that Microsoft is finally set to release their belated SQL Server 2005. From the article: 'Despite a two-year delay, several users who have tested the software cited the improved performance and new functionality it brings as positive developments that likely will convince them to upgrade soon.' The free version can be downloaded directly from Microsoft."
You can download 'web installers' I believe, but ISO images are here
I installed SQL Server 2005 Enterprise downloaded from the MSDN last week.
The Management Studio Interface is pretty good, although not as responsive as I would like on a 2.8 GHz P4. Thankfully stored procedures can be edited in a non-modal window (in tabs).
SQL server also comes with MSXML 6 and SQLXML4. The upgrade analysis tool is very neat.
Microsoft Visual Studio 2005 Professional is much more CPU intensive than the Management Studio. They do look rather similar.
Microsoft Visual SourceSafe 2005 has an updated inteface, however many screens still look the same.
It appears that MS has done some interesting feature shuffling in their various free editions.
m pare-features.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/co
Has anyone out their tested out what is available in SQL express as far as job scheduling , DTS (now ETL) and replication?
Does anyone want to flame me for unashamedly using MS SQL?
As best as I can tell from their spec sheet, the following features of MSDE 2000 are not available in SQL Express:
* No job scheduler in SQL express. SQLAgent worked fine in MSDE 2000.
* Replication: MSDE for SQL could public and subscribe (as far as I understand), while SQL Express 2005 can only subscribe.
* They've changed the name of DTS to "Enterprise ETL Platform" or SSIS or something. While I haven't tested it out yet, it appears that DTS functionality is limited to basic import and export. For the really useful stuff (DTS to web services, for example) you need the pro edition.
Added:
* A user interface. MSDE 2000 basically had none. If you didn't have visual studio, or a developer's license to MSSQL, or some 3rd party administration and query tool, you basically had to use osql (command line).
* You get 4GB instead of 2GB.
Now, I have access to a few large corporate MS SQL servers, so this shouldn't really be a problem. However, large corporate servers have complex change-control processes.
Consequently, I rely on the desktop editions for all my ad-hoc stuff, development, and stuff that hasn't quite made it to production. I also run a database for a non-profit on MSDE, and was hoping to keep the replication features while moving up to SQL Express.
My motto: "A cat is no trade for integrity."
This must be in satire, or ignorance.
a ger
a ger
/ powerdesigner
Q L%20GUI%20Tools/document_view
Postgresql has a great variety of tools, both OSS and commercial that work great. I've been working on an updated list of all the tools. Here are a few of the most popular admin tools:
PGadminIII
http://www.sqlmanager.net/products/postgresql/man
DBvisualizer
http://www.minq.se/products/dbvis/
EMS Postgresql Manager
http://www.sqlmanager.net/products/postgresql/man
PHPpgadmin
http://sourceforge.net/projects/phppgadmin
Sybase Power Designer
http://www.sybase.com/products/enterprisemodeling
ERWIN data modeller
http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/Product.asp?ID=260
CASE Studio 2
http://www.casestudio.com/enu/default.aspx
Postgresql has a vibrant tool community. If you want more info on Postgresql tools see
http://techdocs.postgresql.org/v2/Guides/PostgreS
> Do you have any idea how much Oracle actually costs, compared to a Windows Server licence?
Three years ago I faced a $120k charge to upgrade a four-cpu SQL Server7 server to SQL Server 2000.
Was this cheaper than oracle?
Eh, not really - first off, I could have implemented oracle on a two-way server instead of a four-way and gotten equiv performance (search engine queries). Secondly, I could probably have gotten the oracle licenses down to $20k a cpu.
Oracle now has a *free* low-end database.
These days I'm running a multi-terabyte data warehouse for hundreds of customers on db2 - and it's *far* cheaper than SQL Server. Since db2 bundles most of their top-end capabilities into even the smallest version, I could run my warehouse on the db2 express version for $1500 (total).
So yeah, sometimes sql server is the cheapest solution. But it often isn't.
And then comes the topic of vendor lock-in. With db2 or oracle if you want to move to another database later on it isn't such a big deal. I can move most of my apps between oracle, db2, postgresql, sybase, etc fairly easily. Non-standard sql behavior in mysql are a pain in the butt. And any microsoft *platform* code in mssqlserver are a pain in the butt.
My pet peeve is that bound parameters don't work in subqueries. We have tons of rather sophisticated SQL in our legacy apps; most of them can be rewritten to work on every platform except MSSQL, although often the bound parameter subquery issue can be skirted by rewriting the query as a grouped left outer join.
My other pet peeve is that T-SQL is so danged orthagonal. It's not that you can't do anything you'd want to do in the language (setting aside the things that are supposed to work but don't). It's just that you have to keep going to the manual to find out what construct works in which context.
On the other hand, I think most people using relational databases aren't doing very sophisticated RDBMS stuff -- at least in the DB tier. So for those people integration with the MS toolchain is probably more useful than having capabilities they don't use work.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Here's hoping it went through more testing than VS2005 did...
Did you actually use VC2005, or did you just read a crappy blog entry and assume it fact >.<
Here's the scoop: I've used the VC2005 betas for about two months now. They work fine. No, seriously. Never once did I have a crash. Never once did it corrupt my hard drive. And never once did it kill a penguin. Guys, seerisnah.
Granted, it takes a teensy bit longer to boot than EMACS, but it has a lot of nice features. Like the oft-maligned "intellisense" - it's nice having the function/method/class prototypes at your fingertips as you fill in a function. Or the new, secure versions of strcpy(), memcpy(), and others. It can compile code for a wide variety of applications, such as:
It also supports a wide variety of CPUs:
Fairly impressive, all considering. Although I don't write multi-threaded apps, it does have some nice debugging tools for creating them, a nice GUI for those too lazy to write their own resource scripts, and a nifty-as-all-hell IDE. Contrary to popular opinion, it's stable as all hell, has more features than a nerd's Swiss Army Knife and creates fast code. Quite frankly, for those who actually program, it's a dream - and Microsoft released a beta that any of you could have download from http://msdn.microsoft.com/ (The free and fully-functional Beta is closed now. What, you don't regularly check Microsoft Developer's Network here? :-D)
So... All the VC2005 bashing seems to come from a blind hatred of Microsoft (remember, Bill Gates created his empire coding from his garage, like any proper geek would) and a blind belief in anything that will bash Microsoft. If you actually use VC2005, it's wonderful.
But wait, you can! You can download the "Express Edition" free (as in beer) from here. I don't know how much the "Express Edition" differs from the full product, but if you guys are going to whine about something, at least use it first
DATABASE WOW WOW