Not Just an Upgrade Upgrading my database server and moving from version 6 to version 7 because of a support cycle has always felt a little funny to me. In many cases, I've had systems that were running smoothly and performing as needed. If people were complaining, often this was because of a lack of resources, where we needed more hardware. In other cases, this was a lack of quality code, often from other developers who were unwilling to change their approach. In neither case was an upgrade likely to change anything. However, an upgrade can be more than just buying new license and accessing new features. I was reminded up this by John Sterrett, with a post on how he talks to CEOs about upgrades. The upgrade isn't just a new database server. It's a chance to re-evaluate the system and consider something besides the application. In the list, John looks at this as a cost, security, and compliance decision. These days, Standard might be a better fit than Enterprise and can save on licensing. Better security can lower risk and potentially prevent issues. Being out of support, which is going to happen 3 times in the next 3 years, can be an issue for some companies. New features might reduce the costs of maintaining existing systems. I don't know that this list would have made a lot of sense in the 2000-2005 timeframe, or even in the 2008-2014 range, but it might now. There are considerations beyond just the license cost. Certainly I'd be re-examining my Standard v Enterprise choice in many situations and perhaps using this argument as a reason to press developers to learn to better structure their data models and write better queries. Lowering the resource usage can lower costs. Even archival might be something I'd press on, as less data is less data to query, and honestly, are those old records in tables truly adding value? Or are they muddying the waters of analysis? Better security matters, and I do think modern auth systems are better, but often this might require a security change in other parts of the org, and still might require application redesign to account for a directory authenticating users. That might be entail its own costs and not be worth effort. I don't think upgrades should be automatic, and I am a fan of running a database server for ten years, but I also think that running one for 20 years might be a bad idea. Upgrades ought to be approached with the rational, logical view that this is an opportunity for us, but one that we might choose to take advantage of or pass on. Steve Jones - SSC Editor Join the debate, and respond to today's editorial on the forums | 
