Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Would you consider running SQL Server on Linux?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 90 posts

Re: Ask HN: Would you consider running SQL Server on Linux?

#41

Post by jasode »

If I put on my "CIO" hat, I would say "no".

An observation from several decades of the software business is the concept of the "reference platform". For MS SQL Server, the reference platform is Windows, not Linux.

This means that if development for the different operating systems gets out of sync, it will be the Linux version that lags instead of Windows.

If I have an urgent crisis with a database down and need to call MS tech support[1], their troubleshooting team will be way more familiar with Windows than Linux.

It's really a bad idea to deploy on a non-reference platform. For playing around and experiments, that's ok. However, for deployment on production environments, it's a risk.

The "reference platform" for MS Windows NT was x86, not MIPS or DEC. Therefore, we didn't deploy Windows apps to MIPS machines. (That was a good decision since MIPS, DEC, and Itanium versions of Windows got cancelled.) Solaris reference platform was their SPARC computers and not Intel x86. Yes, Solaris had a version ported to x86. That was ok to play with at home but we wouldn't deploy any commercial production apps with it.

Same for dev environments. If you're using C#, your life will be easier if you go with Windows instead of "C# NET Core" on Linux. If you're programming Ocaml, stick with Linux instead of trying to cobble together Cygwin+MinGW to deploy Ocaml apps on Windows.

Try to stay with the reference platforms to minimize headaches.

[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftservices/support.as...

Re: Ask HN: Would you consider running SQL Server on Linux?

#43

Post by jenkstom »

hungerstrike wrote: post #33
mindcrime wrote: post #8

No, almost certainly not. Why would I use MSSQL in the first place, when I could just use PostgreSQL? The main reason I could see to use MSSQL would be "you're in a Windows shop already", and if that isn't the case, I don't see much reason for it.

I would have said the same thing if I had never used MSSQL. PG just doesn't have the same quality SQL-dialect or tools as MSSQL though. Some very basic facilities are missing from PG like snapshot and transaction logs, batched triggers and being able to return multiple resultsets from a single trip to the database server. Even the free tools for SQL Server are better than anything you can get for PG and there's nothi…

Then again, T-SQL is a developer's nightmare. Especially when compared to PostgreSQL's version of SQL scripting. And when you add on all the supported languages it makes MSSQL quite painful from a SQL developer standpoint.

Re: Ask HN: Would you consider running SQL Server on Linux?

#44

Post by lochii »

slackfan wrote: post #21

I actually have been running SQL Server for linux for the past few months. In a docker container, no less. This is entirely for testing a part of our application that needs to connect to legacy mssql servers. The server is spun up, databases are created programmatically, tests are run, and then the container is destroyed. As for running this in production, ahahaha no.

I'd love to see your dockerfile, would you consider sharing it?

Re: Ask HN: Would you consider running SQL Server on Linux?

#46

Post by discreditable »

scoj wrote: post #19
Beltiras wrote: post #12

Why would I invite that headache when I can just install PostgreSQL instead? https://www.pg-versus-ms.com/ says it all.

The certificate has expired, Chrome gives a nice ugly warning. But thanks for the link, I'm curious.

Another poorly configured Let's Encrypt client. :(

Re: Ask HN: Would you consider running SQL Server on Linux?

#47

Post by james_anderson »

jasode wrote: post #41

If I put on my "CIO" hat, I would say "no". An observation from several decades of the software business is the concept of the "reference platform" . For MS SQL Server, the reference platform is Windows, not Linux. This means that if development for the different operating systems gets out of sync, it will be the Linux version that lags instead of Windows. If I have an urgent crisis with a database down and need to c…

That is a worry. I guess it could depend on the uptake of SQL Server on Linux though.

Re: Ask HN: Would you consider running SQL Server on Linux?

#48

Post by equasar »

kelukelugames wrote: post #27

Related question. Where can i run and host a SQL db for free? Or for cheap. It's for a hobby project.

I don't know a free service but you can run Azure SQL for less than $5 a month.

If you sign up for a 'Developer Program Benefit' in Microsoft, you'll get $25 every month for Azure.

Re: Ask HN: Would you consider running SQL Server on Linux?

#49

Post by fulafel »

hungerstrike wrote: post #33
mindcrime wrote: post #8

No, almost certainly not. Why would I use MSSQL in the first place, when I could just use PostgreSQL? The main reason I could see to use MSSQL would be "you're in a Windows shop already", and if that isn't the case, I don't see much reason for it.

I would have said the same thing if I had never used MSSQL. PG just doesn't have the same quality SQL-dialect or tools as MSSQL though. Some very basic facilities are missing from PG like snapshot and transaction logs, batched triggers and being able to return multiple resultsets from a single trip to the database server. Even the free tools for SQL Server are better than anything you can get for PG and there's nothi…

You can return multiple result sets using a sproc or a view.

Triggers sound strictly less powerful in SQL Server since "for each row" semantics is missing?

Meanwhile there are many PG features missing.

Post reply on HN