How to use Database mail feature in SQL Server 2000

Question

Post reply

How to use Database mail feature in SQL Server 2000

M&M

SSC-Insane

Points: 21700
More actions
March 8, 2010 at 11:25 pm

#212153

Comments posted to this topic are about the item How to use Database mail feature in SQL Server 2000
M&M

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 64 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Satnam Singh Hall of Fame Points: 3542 More actions · Answer 1

Satnam Singh

Hall of Fame

Points: 3542

March 9, 2010 at 12:11 am

#1130470

Nice Article.

vk-kirov SSCertifiable Points: 7686 More actions · Answer 2

most of us are still working on older, SQL Server 2000 servers

Are there any statistics on this?!

Andeavour SSCrazy Points: 2600 More actions · Answer 3

As a freelancer most of the sites I work at are still extensively 2000, with a few 2005 servers. Almost all the businesses I've worked with are still only just considering converting to SQL 2008, as the general consensus among big business (and especially local government) in the UK seems to be "if it works, leave it alone".

So from personal experience I would say 2000 use is still extensive.

josseluiss SSC Enthusiast Points: 148 More actions · Answer 4

Nice workaround, if you do have SQL 2005 indeed. Thus, why not to migrate your SQL 2000 dbs to SQL 2005?

Andeavour SSCrazy Points: 2600 More actions · Answer 5

myxdev-apps (3/9/2010)
Thus, why not to migrate your SQL 2000 dbs to SQL 2005?

Lots of reasons. The business may not see a requirement to migrate the database, there may be elements that won't convert easily, they may not sanction the development time to re-write stored procs or convert hundreds of DTS packages. I've run into all these and more as reasons why companies don't migrate databases.

josseluiss SSC Enthusiast Points: 148 More actions · Answer 6

Andeavour (3/9/2010)
myxdev-apps (3/9/2010)
Thus, why not to migrate your SQL 2000 dbs to SQL 2005?
Lots of reasons.

Yes. I was wondering about the article, not your post, but the other side, those small companies thata can't afford a new SQL Server.

I agree with you that many companies won't upgrade their SQL 2000 for all it implies to them.

jinlye SSC Veteran Points: 230 More actions · Answer 7

From the article:
It might take a few more years before all of the existing SQL Server 2000 applications are upgraded to newer versions of SQL Server.

SQL 2000 SP4 drops out of the extended support phase in April 2013. After that MS won't be doing any security patches, so security holes won't get fixed and your enterprise is at risk. So you need to be planning on upgrading within the next 36 months. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=2852

r.stebbens 78867 SSC-Addicted Points: 407 More actions · Answer 8

RE : SQL 2000. I've been telling a client for more than 6 months that they should upgrade their server and move to at least SQL 2005. This week the 10 year old hardware failed. they are now upgrading by default 😀

Developer, DBA, Pre-Sales consultant.

Kick6Tiger SSCrazy Points: 2380 More actions · Answer 9

I still have to support a SQL 2000 instance for a vendor application that the business can't afford to upgrade at the moment. The new version of the software is a hosted system and very expensive. The current version does not support any SQL beyond 2000.

I don't find configuring SQL Mail on SQL 2000 to be very difficult, but it's nice to know there are options.

Aigle de Guerre!

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736078 More actions · Answer 10

Nice trick for using Database Mail in SQL Server 2000. I must admit I was wondering how you were going to do this when reading the title.

sknox SSChampion Points: 12388 More actions · Answer 11

jinlye (3/9/2010)

From the article:
It might take a few more years before all of the existing SQL Server 2000 applications are upgraded to newer versions of SQL Server.

SQL 2000 SP4 drops out of the extended support phase in April 2013. After that MS won't be doing any security patches, so security holes won't get fixed and your enterprise is at risk. So you need to be planning on upgrading within the next 36 months. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=2852%5B/quote%5D

Yes. 36 months = 3 years, which handily falls within the range of "a few more years". 😛

Still, it's good to have a deadline, and better to be done well before it!

M&M SSC-Insane Points: 21700 More actions · Answer 12

vk-kirov (3/9/2010)
most of us are still working on older, SQL Server 2000 servers
Are there any statistics on this?!

Hi VK,

I wrote this because most of my colleagues are still working on SQL server 2000. Not sure, when they plan to migrate to 2005 or higher.

Moreover, in my company, this purely depends on management. We can remind them often but finally they decide based on budget etc.

M&M

dawidjordaan@gmail.com SSC Enthusiast Points: 160 More actions · Answer 13

This is a great article. Do you have any comments on the security side of things here? We have to follow the CIS procedures that 'outlaw' SQL Mail. Does this workaround have any security implications?

vk-kirov SSCertifiable Points: 7686 More actions · Answer 14

mohammed moinudheen (3/9/2010)
I wrote this because most of my colleagues are still working on SQL server 2000. Not sure, when they plan to migrate to 2005 or higher.

Thank you for your clarification.

mohammed moinudheen (3/9/2010)
Moreover, in my company, this purely depends on management. We can remind them often but finally they decide based on budget etc.

Such a familiar situation 🙂

Thanks for the article, it is a nice example of using new features in old environment 🙂