Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 

The Voice of the DBA

Steve Jones is the editor of SQLServerCentral.com and visits a wide variety of data related topics in his daily editorial. Steve has spent years working as a DBA and general purpose Windows administrator, primarily working with SQL Server since it was ported from Sybase in 1990. You can follow Steve on Twitter at twitter.com/way0utwest

My Connect Items – Won’t Fix

There’s been some work to close out items in Connect that aren’t going to be fixed. I don’t know exactly if these are items that aren’t good ideas, are dropped because of a lack of resources, or because no one wants to figure that out.

However, I had three items closed as Won’t Fix in the last couple days. None are what I’d consider critical, but they were ideas I had to make the product work smoother. I won’t resubmit them, unless I get some feedback that people find them important. Here were my items:

Remove Auto-close

Set the database default to simple

Allow User Objects to be Deprecated

The last one is the one that I think made the most sense. Not as something that’s critical, but something that might help smooth the way that people work with SQL Server, and help them build better software.


Filed under: Blog Tagged: sql server, syndicated

Comments

Posted by Hugo Shebbeare on 18 March 2011

Sounds like perfect sense to me, since we both know these cause problems if not disabled by default. Being closed to good suggestions from MVPs is a bit vexing in my opinion.

Posted by cfradenburg on 18 March 2011

I'm not entirely sure what I think about changing the default recovery model.  I'm wondering if that opens the possibility of people loosing data because they think they have a more thorough backup model than they do.  With Full Recovery one of the first things you would do is set up a log backup which would fail for Simple so I don't think that would get missed.  Of course, MSDB can be changed on an instance but your concern is for inexperienced DBAs who wouldn't think to do that.  I would say a good idea but not a big deal.

For allowing user objects to be deprecated, That would be a wonderful thing to have to track down things that are no longer used.  The product I currently work on has over 3,000 SP, 1,000 tables, 500 views, and almost 200 functions.  I'm sure there are a number of those that aren't used but it would be a massive, massive effort to determine that for sure.  Being able to deprecate objects, going through a couple releases, and then removing them after profiling for deprecated events at several clients over a long duration would be very handy.

Leave a Comment

Please register or log in to leave a comment.