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 ««123»»

Extended Procs Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Tuesday, October 1, 2013 7:35 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:32 PM
Points: 1,316, Visits: 1,686
Haven't had time to research SQL 2014 yet.
Guessed optimistically.
Got it wrong.

Can anyone explain why this should still be around when CLR has been available to replace its functionality since 2005?
Post #1500406
Posted Tuesday, October 1, 2013 7:59 AM


SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 29, 2014 7:56 AM
Points: 1,860, Visits: 1,398
Koen Verbeeck (9/30/2013)
Nice question. Never even heard about it, made me do some research.


+1 Good question. Never really used these, so it was good to do some research on it.




Everything is awesome!
Post #1500429
Posted Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:12 AM


SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 1:23 AM
Points: 2,509, Visits: 2,386
sknox (10/1/2013)
Haven't had time to research SQL 2014 yet.
Guessed optimistically.
Got it wrong.

Can anyone explain why this should still be around when CLR has been available to replace its functionality since 2005?

Because of performance! CLR is very dangerous: bad written code can waste cpu time and memory resource.
Post #1500440
Posted Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:15 AM


SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, August 4, 2014 12:29 PM
Points: 1,812, Visits: 584
nice question Dave62..
Post #1500444
Posted Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:21 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:32 PM
Points: 1,316, Visits: 1,686
Carlo Romagnano (10/1/2013)
sknox (10/1/2013)
Haven't had time to research SQL 2014 yet.
Guessed optimistically.
Got it wrong.

Can anyone explain why this should still be around when CLR has been available to replace its functionality since 2005?

Because of performance! CLR is very dangerous: bad written code can waste cpu time and memory resource.


And XPs can't!?
Post #1500448
Posted Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:53 AM


SSCrazy Eights

SSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy Eights

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 5:54 PM
Points: 8,741, Visits: 9,290
Dscheypie (10/1/2013)
MarkusB (10/1/2013)
Not sure about this question.
I think there is no correct answer given, because even the link provided for SQL 2014 says "Topic Status: Some information in this topic is pre-release and subject to change in future releases"

Since SQL 2014 is not released yet, you can't be sure what will be in it or not. So I would have chosen "None of the above"


No, Markus, Dave62 is right!
Look at this document:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143729(v=sql.120).aspx

There also it is stated that this feature still exists and will be refused in future times. Just look for the key word "XP_API".

Or did I misunderstand you? You think that because it is pre-release it might change until the official release of SQL Server 2014? Then of course forget my remark above. I myself fought with this detail and decided to ignore it

Best regards

Jens-Peter

Edit: detail etc.

Unless MS have radically changed their deprecation-removal policy, that fact that the Sql 2012 documentation lists the XP stuff (apart from 3 specific XPs) as available in the next release but to be removed some time in future", which can't be dismissed as pre-release, can be taken as definitive. I will be very surprised if they have adopted an "oh, we told them it wouldn't be withdrawn yet but we'll withdraw it now anyway even though there's not now time for them to change their stuff in time to adopt SQL 2014 any time reasonably soon" policy instead. If not because of the inevitable damage to revenue, then for the effect on how well their customers trust them.


Tom
Post #1500459
Posted Tuesday, October 1, 2013 1:50 PM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 29, 2014 1:51 PM
Points: 21,644, Visits: 15,317
Stewart "Arturius" Campbell (10/1/2013)
I remember SQL 2008 & R2 and 2012 warning that this will be removed in a future version. It appears that 2014 still carries that warning.

I wonder if this will ever be removed...


I ponder the same thing.




Jason AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
I have given a name to my pain...
MCM SQL Server


SQL RNNR

Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw
Posting Data Etiquette - Jeff Moden
Hidden RBAR - Jeff Moden
VLFs and the Tran Log - Kimberly Tripp
Post #1500578
Posted Wednesday, October 2, 2013 2:08 AM
SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 29, 2014 10:20 AM
Points: 1,740, Visits: 6,366
I guessed right, on the basis that very little deprecated functionality ever seems to get removed.
Someone will now post a massive list to prove me wrong
Post #1500689
Posted Wednesday, October 2, 2013 7:52 PM


SSCarpal Tunnel

SSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:50 AM
Points: 4,425, Visits: 3,417
sknox (10/1/2013)
. . . Can anyone explain why this should still be around when CLR has been available to replace its functionality since 2005?

Deprecating this would necessitate massive changes to SharePoint.
Post #1500965
Posted Wednesday, October 2, 2013 8:08 PM


SSCrazy Eights

SSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy Eights

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 5:54 PM
Points: 8,741, Visits: 9,290
Revenant (10/2/2013)
sknox (10/1/2013)
. . . Can anyone explain why this should still be around when CLR has been available to replace its functionality since 2005?

Deprecating this would necessitate massive changes to SharePoint.

Also, removing the ability to write extended SPs from customers while still supporting a very large and visible collection of XPs writen and released by MS would look a bit silly, and they still haven't managed to replace them all with something other than XPs (although they often don't use that prefix). But look, another 3 MS XPs (with SP prefex, of course) are withdrawn in SQL 2014, so they are gtting there (slowly).


Tom
Post #1500968
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««123»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse