SQL Server 2016 SP1 CU1 breaks Database Mail (again)

  • sean redmond

    SSCertifiable

    Points: 5739

    We have just installed a test SQL Server 2016 server on a Windows 2016 standard server. Needless to say, we brought it up to date with SP1 and CU1.
    Database Mail was configured as per usual and on testing, it didn't work. No mails were sent. It worked with a previous SQL Server 2016 server. It also had SP1 but CU1 wasn't yet available.

    This is from Cumulative Update 1 for SQL Server 2016 SP1 [https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3208177]
    Note After you apply this update, Database Mail does not work on computers that do not have the .NET Framework 3.5 installed. Microsoft is currently working on addressing this in a future cumulative update. See the following KB article for more information about affected builds and suggested workarounds

    There is a suggested fix: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3186435/fix-sql-server-2016-database-mail-does-not-work-on-a-computer-that-does-not-have-the-.net-framework-3.5-installed
    FIX: SQL Server 2016 Database Mail does not work on a computer that does not have the .NET Framework 3.5 installed

    Symptoms
    Assume that you install Microsoft SQL Server 2016 on a computer that has the .NET Framework 4.6.1 installed. If the computer does not have the .NET Framework 3.5 installed, the Database Mail feature does not work correctly. For example, if you configure and send a test email message, the message is queued but is never sent.
    Note This issue also affects instances that are running SQL Server 2016 SP1 CU1. Microsoft is currently working on a fix that will be made available in a future cumulative update. This KB article will be updated with the relevant information when the fix becomes available.

    Resolution
    This problem was fixed in the following cumulative updates for SQL Server: Cumulative Update 2 for SQL Server 2016 (an earlier CU, btw)

    Workaround
    To work around this issue, manually install the .NET Framework 3.5.

    Is it wise to apply patches and CU2 out of historical order? I am loath to do it. It has anyway been installed as part of SP1.
    I am, by no means, an expert on security but it seems to me that .Net 3.5 is old and therefore ridden with security bugs. Is it not foolish to install .NET 3.5?
    Database-Mail *is* important to us. It is an essential part of our automation system.
    Any ideas?

  • Thom A

    SSC Guru

    Points: 98407

    As per this article.

    .NET Framework 3.5 SP1: Beginning with .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 (SP1) the .NET Framework is defined as a component instead of an independent product. So, support for .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 is driven by the support lifecycle policy of the Windows operating system (i.e. when Windows is in the Mainstream Support phase or Extended Support phase, so are its components). When a product such as Windows reaches the end of support, so do its related components. .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 is supported on Windows Server 2003 SP2, Windows Vista SP2, Windows 7 SP1, Windows Server 2008 SP2, Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1, Windows 8.1 Update, Windows Server 2012, Windows Server 2012 R2, and Windows 10 according to the end of support date for each operating system.

    Emphasis mine.

    As Windows 10 is still supported, so is 3.5 (SP1), and so any security patches will be addressed. It is therefore very unlikely that 3.5 could be seen as a security risk.

    On the flip side, however, support for .net 4-4.5.1 ended in January 2016.

    Thom~

    Excuse my typos and sometimes awful grammar. My fingers work faster than my brain does.

  • Gazareth

    One Orange Chip

    Points: 27737

    Regarding installing CU2, culmative updates are relevant to the service pack they're for, so you won't be able to install CU2 for the RTM release on top of SP1.
    Presumably if they've fixed it for RTM, the fix for SP1 can't be far behind.

    I'd also not view .NET 3.5 SP1 as a security risk.

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

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