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

SQL 2000. Now its out of support, what are the risks to existing instances? Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Thursday, May 23, 2013 2:50 PM
SSC-Enthusiastic

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 5:42 PM
Points: 107, Visits: 81
Hello everyone.

I am still required to support some SQL 2000 instances. I would like to put forward a really good reason for the clients to spend the cash to upgrade. So I was wondering what the wider implications of SQL 2000 going out of support are. What are the risks to a SQL 2000 instance from day to day operations and other Microsoft products?

I know there will be no more service packs or patches released for SQL 2000, but what about the server it runs on. Does anyone know if Microsoft will still test Server patches against a SQL 2000 instance? Or will every Windows Server patch (security or otherwise) be an ever increasing risk of breaking the SQL 2000 install?

Cheers,

Andrew.
Post #1456222
Posted Thursday, May 23, 2013 3:00 PM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:33 PM
Points: 1,351, Visits: 753
Is the database to large to migrate them to Express Edition? Express has a database size limit of 10GB. Or is there an issue with using features in 2000 that are no longer supported.

I would recommend migrating to Express Edition if cost is the only issue.
Post #1456226
Posted Thursday, May 23, 2013 5:24 PM
SSC-Enthusiastic

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 5:42 PM
Points: 107, Visits: 81
Thanks for the reply.

It's not so much the size of the DB or even the $ cost. It's the amount of effort the client would have to go to. Some instances are used by custom applications built by companies that no longer exist. So contractors would have to be brought in to code an update. Other clients take the stance that they are not internet facing (so security is not that big a deal), and everything is working, so why change things.

I'm looking for a reason to go to that effort besides the instance itself being unsupported. If I can say with confidence that the other Microsoft products that support a SQL 2000 instance (Windows server for example) will become increasingly "hostile" to it, then I have a better argument to take to the clients for an upgrade.

Of course, if Microsoft will continue to take SQL 2000 installations into consideration when creating Server patches, then it's not an issue, but it would be nice to be sure :)
Post #1456251
Posted Friday, May 24, 2013 7:36 AM


SSChampion

SSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampionSSChampion

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 29, 2014 2:32 PM
Points: 13,302, Visits: 12,168
andy mack (5/23/2013)
Thanks for the reply.

It's not so much the size of the DB or even the $ cost. It's the amount of effort the client would have to go to. Some instances are used by custom applications built by companies that no longer exist. So contractors would have to be brought in to code an update. Other clients take the stance that they are not internet facing (so security is not that big a deal), and everything is working, so why change things.

I'm looking for a reason to go to that effort besides the instance itself being unsupported. If I can say with confidence that the other Microsoft products that support a SQL 2000 instance (Windows server for example) will become increasingly "hostile" to it, then I have a better argument to take to the clients for an upgrade.

Of course, if Microsoft will continue to take SQL 2000 installations into consideration when creating Server patches, then it's not an issue, but it would be nice to be sure :)


Since 2000 is out of support IF Microsoft considers what happens to a 2000 instance it would be by accident. The pain of upgrading will never go away. Over time it will become more and more difficult. Unless the systems in question have an expected end of life the decision to upgrade SQL is really a case of "when" not "if". At some point it will be difficult to find a server that will run an old enough OS so that 2000 will even install on it. I realize that isn't a big deal today but think about 5 years from now when you need to replace the server. You will have to make a tough decision at that point. You either by an older and under powered server so you can run the older and slower OS that will support the older and slower version of SQL.

It is a difficult argument and one that companies have a hard time understanding. Good luck.


_______________________________________________________________

Need help? Help us help you.

Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.

Need to split a string? Try Jeff Moden's splitter.

Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1)
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2)
Post #1456499
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase

Permissions Expand / Collapse