SQL Server on Linux

  • Steve Jones - SSC Editor

    SSC Guru

    Points: 714636

    Comments posted to this topic are about the item SQL Server on Linux

  • Yet Another DBA

    SSCarpal Tunnel

    Points: 4299

    We been here before, admittedly 20 years ago and SQL Server ran on the proper Unixs like Solaris.

    I do wonder if it will be enough to persuade those who are anti Microsoft to adopt.

  • Gary Varga

    SSC Guru

    Points: 82166

    I doubt any "anti" collective will be interested as rarely is the basis for their position based totally on facts as much as a mix of facts with an inherent belief that what they oppose is "wrong" (with no sane definition of what they believe "wrong" is). We find this in fanbois and fangrrrls of all persuasions.

    I have personally met many IT professionals who would like to consider SQL Server as it is deemed a RDBMS worthy of consideration however its costs are often deemed prohibitive due to the additional requirement (over its competitors) of OS licenses.

    At this rate I may have to pick up Linux again. It's been over a decade now!!! [Please no "I have made time to get [distro X] running and so should everyone else" comments]

    Gaz

    -- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!

  • Ed Wagner

    SSC Guru

    Points: 286955

    I used Unix years ago, but never got into Lunix. It'll be very interesting to see how the implement this. SQL Server is so integrated with the Windows, I'm curious about how they're going to integrate SQL with a different OS. I also wonder what flavors of Linux they'll support.

    And Gary's probably right - the anti-MS collective probably won't be swayed. It seems that they have this deep-seeded emotional attachment to MS-bashing.

  • jasona.work

    SSC-Forever

    Points: 49854

    My first (well second) thought when I saw the announcement was MS was pulling a *long* running April Fools gag...

    My third thought was that my old boss (a serious FOSS zealot) would be crowing in his office and making plans to migrate as many of the clients' servers that use SQL as possible. Had the wife ask one of the guys I used to work with (she works at the company) if he'd heard about this, which he had, and what the old boss might've said...

    Apparently my old boss still subscribes to the M$ evil empire, embrace / extend / extinguish view of MS, as he was of the opinion that MS would be releasing a stripped down, over-priced, you want all the features buy Windows version of SQL.

    Frankly, I think that's the least likely outcome of this, as anything other than a nearly feature-complete SQL would be shooting themselves in the foot. There may be bits that aren't in the first release, but I would expect MS to be pushing hard to get SQL2016 (Linux) to feature parity with SQL2016 (Windows.) It's just business sense. Linux has a fairly solid grip on many server environments, so if MS wants to expand their installed base (and increase their bottom line,) they're going to need a competitive product, not "SQL 2016 Express Edition for Linux, that'll be $700 for the license please." I'd expect MS will keep the pricing similar to the current products, as they're most likely aiming at the Oracle installs on Linux...

  • Ed Wagner

    SSC Guru

    Points: 286955

    jasona.work (3/15/2016)


    Frankly, I think that's the least likely outcome of this, as anything other than a nearly feature-complete SQL would be shooting themselves in the foot. There may be bits that aren't in the first release, but I would expect MS to be pushing hard to get SQL2016 (Linux) to feature parity with SQL2016 (Windows.) It's just business sense. Linux has a fairly solid grip on many server environments, so if MS wants to expand their installed base (and increase their bottom line,) they're going to need a competitive product, not "SQL 2016 Express Edition for Linux, that'll be $700 for the license please." I'd expect MS will keep the pricing similar to the current products, as they're most likely aiming at the Oracle installs on Linux...

    I agree with a stripped-down version being a bad idea. Another bad idea is software installed on a local server that access Azure for you, but no data is stored locally. It'll *very* interesting to see how this plays out.

  • kiwood

    Ten Centuries

    Points: 1011

    I think this makes a lot of sense when you consider the direction of .NET. Microsoft has done a lot of work to bring .NET to Linux with a commitment to make ASP.NET vNext work across the platforms.

    Once you realize that Microsoft has moved past the "protect Windows" stage, their moves make complete sense. It also plays into their shift from selling software to renting it.

  • bdettloff

    SSC Enthusiast

    Points: 122

    Of course, it won't be independent of the operating system. DB2 on Windows and on Linux is very different from DB2 on z/OS (mainframe). The O/S will have an impact on the DBMS -- for good or for ill. It is an exciting time for database professionals.

  • akljfhnlaflkj

    SSC Guru

    Points: 76202

    Ed Wagner (3/15/2016)


    the anti-MS collective probably won't be swayed. It seems that they have this deep-seeded emotional attachment to MS-bashing.

    Just like in politics, that will never change.

  • ZZartin

    SSC-Dedicated

    Points: 30311

    Interesting, so is this a move to try to take market share from MySQL? MS is already beating Oracle in the licensing department so it doesn't seem like this would be aimed at Oracle and part of the attractiveness of a LAMP setup right now is no licensing costs at all.

    And what exactly are we going to be getting? Just the bare bones DB engine or will it come with the package SSIS/SSRS/SSAS? And are they going to be releasing linux versions of the tools as well? Is it going to support integration with an AD environment etc?

  • Eric M Russell

    SSC Guru

    Points: 124967

    For years, folks have been using Linux servers as a VM host for running instances of Windows / SQL Server. At least for these customers, Windows is an uncessary OS abstraction layer that costs additional overhead and licensing.

    "Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho

  • Gail Shaw

    SSC Guru

    Points: 1004424

    ZZartin (3/15/2016)


    Interesting, so is this a move to try to take market share from MySQL?

    Oracle I'd imagine, more than MySQL, especially if you look at their 'free licenses if you move from Oracle' offer. Though, if there's an express edition of SQL Server for Linux, that might be usable in place of MySQL for many smaller DBs.

    Gail Shaw
    Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
    SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

    We walk in the dark places no others will enter
    We stand on the bridge and no one may pass
  • Gail Shaw

    SSC Guru

    Points: 1004424

    jasona.work (3/15/2016)


    he was of the opinion that MS would be releasing a stripped down, over-priced, you want all the features buy Windows version of SQL.

    I don't understand why people would think that. SQL's always been the 'everything in the box' DB engine.

    Had one guy on twitter stating that 'obviously' SQL Server on Linux would have no CLR and no T-SQL stored procedure support. Say what?

    Gail Shaw
    Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
    SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

    We walk in the dark places no others will enter
    We stand on the bridge and no one may pass
  • Aaron N. Cutshall

    SSCrazy Eights

    Points: 8685

    I also wonder how the technical hurdles would be accomplished as over the years SQL Server as been so tightly integrated with Windows that many of the services for SQL Server are handled by Windows. Oracle was always written as a platform agnostic DB and is one of the reasons for its complexity. I wonder if SQL Server would have to follow suit to also be platform agnostic.

    Personally, I think this opens up a world of possibilities and would enable SQL Server to be more competitive and fit more scenarios. I just wonder if it's too good to be true...

  • Andrew..Peterson

    SSCertifiable

    Points: 6607

    MS CEO Satya Nadella seems to be moving Microsoft towards a product company, regardless of OS. Years ago, when Steve Jobs met with Bill Gates to help save Apple, a big part of the pitch was that MS was a product company, not an OS company. So we started to have Office on the mac. And now Office for iOS and I think Android. And we have MS products in the cloud. Office 365, SQL Server, etc.

    For all we know, SQL Server in the cloud is already running on Linux or Unix. I'd say it is a clear movement to focus on products, and less on OS. Windows just becomes one of many OS options where they can sell products. It all makes sense, and I'd say is the right move.

    The more you are prepared, the less you need it.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 47 total)

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