61–70 of 90 posts
We know open-source RDBMS like Postgres, and the ones developed by Unix/Linux vendors like Oracle, are unlikely to drop Linux support anytime soon. But can we say the same about MSSQL? Today we got this CEO... but tomorrow?
It's a risk we're not willing to take, specially when there's no SQL Server feature that we cannot find elsewhere.
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…
MSSQL also runs on a abstraction layer since v2005 so there's no inherent problem with running on Linux. Also containers change the entire scenario.
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.
That all being said, I would expect that there are also companies moving to use MSSQL in Linux for production as well, but personally, I would wait a couple of years to hear other's experiences.
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.
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…
Support is support, Microsoft is very comfortable with Linux and uses a lot internally already. They're also partners with Redhat which is what most enterprises will use anyway. MSSQL also runs on a abstraction layer since v2005 so there's no inherent problem with running on Linux. Also containers change the entire scenario.
Yes, one would think an extra abstraction layer would render platforms exactly equal but that's not the real-world outcome. For example, Windows Server also runs on an "abstraction layer" called HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) and yet we had production problems with Windows on Itanium that had specific knowledge base articles and hotfixes for Itanium.
Did Microsoft premier support help us with Itanium problems?!? Yes, they were responsive and eventually solved some obscure bugs. But their support for Intel x86 was more complete and up-to-date. Likewise, I anticipate that Microsoft will be competent and helpful with customers running SQL Server on Linux. But I don't expect their specialists to have the same level of expertise as MSSQL on Windows.
If someone wants to run MS SQL Server on Linux, that's fine but don't think the enterprise platforms are equal. That usually doesn't turn out to be the case.
>Also containers change the entire scenario.
I'd be totally comfortable with MSSQL on Linux for dev/sandbox/QA environments (avoids licensing costs of Windows). But not for mission-critical production deployment.
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…
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?
https://hub.docker.com/r/microsoft/mssql-server-linux/
So no real dockerfile
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.
so is your apprehension because of sql server on linux, or because of docker, or because of the combination of the two? this post is snarky but lacks real information.
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've been doing similar stuff with docker in my CI pipelines. So are you testing your app on Linux SQL Servers and then deploying to Windows SQL Servers? Should be OK...