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

SQL 2000 to SQL 2005: Where have all the old features gone? Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Friday, April 27, 2007 8:57 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 14, 2014 9:45 PM
Points: 229, Visits: 276
I miss seeing easyly when a job had failed or a database been marked suspect because datafiles wasn't available


Post #361567
Posted Friday, April 27, 2007 10:21 AM
Grasshopper

GrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopperGrasshopper

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 6:22 PM
Points: 13, Visits: 18

Is this article joke? Everything mentioned exists in SQL 2000 ...xp_fixeddrives backupset ,restorehistory etc..I used those features since 2000 came out.

Post #361619
Posted Friday, April 27, 2007 2:41 PM


SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 29, 2014 2:54 PM
Points: 223, Visits: 339

Thankfully, SP2 (perhaps SP1 as well) has a host of reports that mimic the old TaskPad (which I used extensively).  Just right-click on the database name, select 'Reports' --> Standard Reports.  There are 17 to choose from, they're actually pretty nice.  We (SQL Server community as a whole) must've got someone's ear at MS.

Post #361692
Posted Friday, April 27, 2007 2:49 PM
SSC-Enthusiastic

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, August 1, 2014 4:03 PM
Points: 192, Visits: 131

100% agree. Event after using sql 2005 for around 8 months, still missing those 'lost features'.

Probably, some R&D people in MS decided to take them off since they are just from schools? just kidding




Post #361693
Posted Monday, April 30, 2007 8:34 AM


SSChasing Mays

SSChasing MaysSSChasing MaysSSChasing MaysSSChasing MaysSSChasing MaysSSChasing MaysSSChasing MaysSSChasing Mays

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 9:23 AM
Points: 649, Visits: 206

The original point of the article was essentially about using the SQL Server 2005 client tools to manage SQL Server 2000 instances. Based on my experiences of the past few months, I say that doing this is a big mistake.

The SQL Server 2000 client tools were for all intents and purposes "second generation" -- 2.0 versions, revamped and revised from SQL Server 7.0. From what little I've heard, the SQL Server 2005 client tools were rewritten from the ground up in .Net 2.0 (which some say explains why they're so darn slow). Thus: on the one hand, no way could they recreate *everything* in their brand-new rewrite on the first go; on the other, maybe the original (C++?) coders cashed in their stock options, and MS had to recruit a fresh batch of college students.

[I'll site the interview by Rick Chapman with Joel Spolsky that he included in the back of his  (Champamn's) book "In Search of Stupidity" for why the "rebuild from the gound up" trick is so very dangerous. Can't find it online, alas.]

Anyway, my point and strong recommendation is this: manage SQL 2005 instances with the SQL 2005 client tools, and manage the SQL 2000 instances with the SQL 2000 client tools. It makes no sense to manage 2000 in 2005 *if* you have no 2005 instances to support as well. (And if I did, I'd have both sets of client tools available, if only to maintain my sanity.)

   Philip

 




Post #361994
Posted Thursday, May 3, 2007 11:02 AM
SSC-Addicted

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, August 23, 2014 10:23 PM
Points: 444, Visits: 563

so we are going backward using command lines instead of GUI?  What a smart move by MS.




Post #363061
Posted Thursday, May 3, 2007 5:44 PM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 14, 2014 9:45 PM
Points: 229, Visits: 276
that would be quite true for rebuilding system databases


Post #363183
Posted Thursday, May 3, 2007 7:04 PM
SSC-Addicted

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, August 23, 2014 10:23 PM
Points: 444, Visits: 563
is this time for new customers to pick Oracle instead of MS SQL?


Post #363196
Posted Friday, May 4, 2007 2:29 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:16 AM
Points: 1,270, Visits: 2,784
I don't know if it is THAT back to pick oracle over ss...


Post #363240
Posted Friday, May 4, 2007 9:08 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 14, 2014 9:45 PM
Points: 229, Visits: 276
i think the application runs better and has much more features, but from admin point of view - day by day tasks I sometimes miss the EM


Post #363333
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««1234

Permissions Expand / Collapse