MS SQL 2012 Disadvantages.

  • Dear All,

    I have little query regarding MS SQL 2012 I would humbly request if you could please help me in this regard.

    My Client is currently running MS SQL 2000 and want to migrate on MS SQL 2012 and we are suggesting him to move onto MS SQL 2008 because of stable release/ version.

    Can you please give me some valuable DISADVANTAGES points for MS SQL 2012 so that we should convinces them to finally move onto MS SQL 2008.

    Thanks

    Adeel Imtiaz

  • i would definitely recommend going to 2012, and not recommend 2008, or even 2008R2. just because YOU might not have experience in 2012 does not mean you should not recommend the latest and greatest.

    code changes for upgrading any application(s) from 2000-> to 2008 will be identical to 2000->2012.

    official support for 2008 is scheduled to end in two years:

    http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/search/?sort=PN&alpha=SQL

    substantial enhancements to 2012 make it faster, easier to use

    http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/en/us/editions.aspx

    Better support for the latest hardware that the client would undoubtedly have to buy.(Virtualization)

    Lowell


    --help us help you! If you post a question, make sure you include a CREATE TABLE... statement and INSERT INTO... statement into that table to give the volunteers here representative data. with your description of the problem, we can provide a tested, verifiable solution to your question! asking the question the right way gets you a tested answer the fastest way possible!

  • disadvantages:

    2012 might be more expensive to implement depending on version/hardware

    not all 3rd party software vendors have confirmed official support for 2012 as a backend database (check into what software they want to run on it)

    2012 is relatively new - many organisations (such as the one I work for) avoid implementing new software until SP1 has been released.

    That being said I wholeheartedly agree with Lowell. The disadvantages to using 2008 are worse. Specifically there's only 2 more years of mainstream support as mentioned by Lowell.

    That's all I can think of. SQL Server is a mature product in itself and there are plenty of organisations out there using 2012 who are happy with it. If the only reason you are trying to discourage it is because it's too new I'd seriously recommend you dig deeper into 2012. it took only a matter of days for the whole world to start hating vista in blog posts and forums etc, if sql 2012 was shipping with loads of problems like vista we'd all know about it already so it's almost certainly more stable than you think.

    So my advice is do some research on the software your clients are going to run on the server, if their vendors do not support 2012 then I would advise against 2012 as you would loose application support. If the vendor(s) do support 2012 on the backend then I do not currently know of any good reason not to upgrade to it.

    Ben

    ^ Thats me!

    ----------------------------------------
    01010111011010000110000101110100 01100001 0110001101101111011011010111000001101100011001010111010001100101 01110100011010010110110101100101 011101110110000101110011011101000110010101110010
    ----------------------------------------

  • Lowell and Ben are right. There is no disadvantage to going all the way to SQL 2012 if the applications support it.

    The one thing you're going to have to watch out for is that there is no direct upgrade path from 2000 to 2012. If you want to do in-place upgrades you'll first have to go to an intermediate version such as 2005. I don't know what the in-place upgrade experience was like prior to 2012 but we went from 2008 R2 to 2012 in-place with no hassles.

    [font="Tahoma"]Bryant E. Byrd, BSSE MCDBA MCAD[/font]
    Business Intelligence Administrator
    MSBI Administration Blog

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

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