Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase 1234»»»

Upgrading to 2012 Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Thursday, April 18, 2013 11:18 PM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 12:39 PM
Points: 32,833, Visits: 14,972
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Upgrading to 2012






Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1444232
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 1:14 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 11:38 AM
Points: 2,868, Visits: 1,711
The shift to per core licencing rather than per CPU while a reasonable thing to do does have big cost implications.

"Always-on" technology puts us in a good place for hybrid cloud implementations.

Column store indexes definitely justify the cost if you are running a data warehouse.

If security is a constant concern then the security enhancements of 2012 may be worth it.


I'm going to say something contraversial here. You can do cold hard financial logical analysis of cost vs benefits and put forward a recommendation but if your business people read about a fabulous new feature that will solve all their problems then somehow fact based cost analysis goes out of the window. Even if the facts say don't the "feeling" is do. A bit of a double-edged sword that one so make sure you are holding the handle.


LinkedIn Profile
Newbie on www.simple-talk.com
Post #1444247
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 3:04 AM
SSC-Addicted

SSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-Addicted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:47 AM
Points: 452, Visits: 555
I'm happily using SQL2008 and still finalizing the shift from older 2005/2000 servers to 2008, with one exception our sharepoint 2010 install is run using SQL 2012 as the BI integration is far beyond all previous versions and the only selling point as far as the business was concerned. The majority of business apps need a working database and unless application vendors insist on new versions we stay where we are.
Post #1444279
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 5:14 AM
SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 6:24 AM
Points: 882, Visits: 1,355
We're in the process of upgrading, and in fact, we're going live this weekend with SQL 2012. It's only one instance of many.

Our company skips releases, so we're moving from SQL 2005 to SQL 2012. For us, it is NOT cost effective to upgrade to every SQL release because it takes us about 3 years to migrate all databases over to the next version; which coincides with MS 3 year release plan. If we upgraded with every release, my full time job would be upgrades.

SQL 2012 is an outstanding release.



Post #1444315
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 6:07 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 7:09 AM
Points: 1,381, Visits: 2,005
Our customer base still mostly runs XP and they don't plan to upgrade their OS soon. So we go where the money is therefore we will stay with 2008 R2 for quite long.
So long that I'm not ever sure if we will upgrade on the next release of SQL server (v. 12) either.
I know, this will be quite an issue.
Post #1444339
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 6:32 AM


SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, April 21, 2014 9:08 AM
Points: 243, Visits: 788
We have no plans to upgrade to 2012. For us, there is so discernible business benefit to doing so.

We have a mix of applications running both 2005 and 2008, and they're all working fine. These are straightforward client server apps with nothing fancy involved, just basic d/b functions and a little BI. If it ain't broke ...


Sigerson

"No pressure, no diamonds." - Thomas Carlyle
Post #1444348
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 6:51 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:30 PM
Points: 2,417, Visits: 3,460
Many of our SQL server instances are running packaged software. It's up to the vendors when they switch. We usually follow suit about a year later.
We have two vendors still running 2005, most are on 2008 and none are planning for 2012.
Post #1444357
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 7:36 AM


Hall of Fame

Hall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of Fame

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, March 03, 2014 7:07 AM
Points: 3,628, Visits: 330
We're a US government (US Air Force) organization and we'll be sticking with 2008 R2 for the forseeable future. My specific application runs using SQL 2008 on three different networks, all of different classification levels. In order for us to upgrade anything we have to get Information Assurance and the security officers to approve the new software for all three networks. That's typically a nightmare. Fortunately SQL is US-owned software so the process is much simpler. Getting software developed by foreign-owned companies approved is nearly impossible.


Post #1444394
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 7:45 AM
SSC-Enthusiastic

SSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, February 03, 2014 6:39 PM
Points: 174, Visits: 427
Greetings,

I am currently in the process of updating our system to SQL 2012. Our present system is SQL 2005. Needless to say, this is causing us some problems as 2005 is no longer supported or being updated. So, by making the big jump from 2005 to 2012, the company felt that we could avoid the need to run a database upgrade for at least 5 years. We can also keep our system more secure with the better security enhancements and encryption techniques. We felt it was easier than upgrading to 2008 and then needing to upgrade again in 2 - 3 years.

Have a good day.
Post #1444403
Posted Friday, April 19, 2013 7:51 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, March 22, 2014 2:11 PM
Points: 34, Visits: 88
Two words: Columnstore rocks! It's a game changer in SQL Server 2012, & even more so now that it's writeable in SQL Server v.next codename SQL 14 (& already in production in PDW). By itself, columnstore can be a compelling reason to upgrade.


Post #1444411
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 1234»»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse