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

How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 207 posts

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#121

Post by kthejoker2 »

alkonaut wrote: post #106
tkubacki wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to make things easy on Windows - it's law of nature.

It's actually not - if you try to avoid integrating in any way with the os. Shared-nothing apps are pretty nice. SQL server and a few of the other behemoth apps seem to have a very hard time staying separate from windows which is annoying. In Linux the design benefit is that there are package managers and the flaw is that there are many. Shipping a simple binary installer for multiple distributions is still tricky.

SQL Server has a heavy memory management dependency, pretty hard not to bake itself into the OS. That abstraction platform mentioned in the article is a godsend. They'll tighten up the Windows install over time, but Linux (ironically) gets all the juice for the first go-around.

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#122

Post by asdfgadsfgasfdg »

eterm wrote: post #87
reitanqild wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brainstorming with you: Maybe we could have another queue /possiblespam like we have for /newest? Or we could make a competition out of it: 1point for a correct spam identification -10 for false positive

This is way off topic, but that kind of simple gamification is "broken" because there are three Nash equilibrium, only one of which is actually marking spam correctly. If everyone marks everything as spam, then anyone not also doing the same is "punished" because they are missing out on points they could get by marking more things as spam. If everyone is marking everything as "not spam" then anyone marking spam as sp…

HN already punishes accounts that either flag or vouch a different way to the moderators final decision. This should approach should help make the two pathological minima less likely.

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#123

Post by tw04 »

CrLf wrote: post #102

I'm still unsure of the usefulness of SQL Server on Linux. I don't see the point of running SQL Server on Linux (I'd rather choose PostgreSQL or something), nor do I see the point of choosing Linux if I'd already settled for SQL Server. I don't think this (in the end) is anything more than a marketing trick, there to give the illusion of choice. This is not uncommon in ISVs, btw. There are many commercial offerings t…

That's because you're missing the point. MS isn't competing against Postgres or MySQL, they're competing against Oracle, DB2, and Hana. All of which have a variant that runs on Linux. They need to be just as flexible as their real competition if they want to continue to expand market share.

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#124

Post by foodie_ »

djsumdog wrote: post #29

Years ago I was part of a project that became a startup. We got a Bizspark license and originally developed for MS SQL. Later we added in support for Postgres/MySQL. Running unit tests against Postgres/MySQL was pretty easy on my Linux box, but for MS SQL I'd have to start a VM and provision SQL Server 2012 (at the time). I jumped on the Linux version as soon as I heard about it. I never got an invite to the preview,…

Curious why have postgres and SQL server?

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#125

Post by unixhero »

foodie_ wrote: post #124
djsumdog wrote: post #29

Years ago I was part of a project that became a startup. We got a Bizspark license and originally developed for MS SQL. Later we added in support for Postgres/MySQL. Running unit tests against Postgres/MySQL was pretty easy on my Linux box, but for MS SQL I'd have to start a VM and provision SQL Server 2012 (at the time). I jumped on the Linux version as soon as I heard about it. I never got an invite to the preview,…

Curious why have postgres and SQL server?

Mssql has a lot of cool and valuable entry level features bundled with it, as an added bonus to the transactional relational database.

Like the business intelligence features

Datawarehouse functionality Machine learning capabilities within the warehouse suite

Mdx (which enables things like power pivot / power query)

Myself I am a Postgres guys, but man those extras are really enticing to me as a problem solver.

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#126

Post by gwbas1c »

CrLf wrote: post #102

I'm still unsure of the usefulness of SQL Server on Linux. I don't see the point of running SQL Server on Linux (I'd rather choose PostgreSQL or something), nor do I see the point of choosing Linux if I'd already settled for SQL Server. I don't think this (in the end) is anything more than a marketing trick, there to give the illusion of choice. This is not uncommon in ISVs, btw. There are many commercial offerings t…

I work for a SAAS company that uses MS SQL. I've heard over an over that ops and management loves MS SQL but hates Windows.

MS SQL is the product that people are choosing, not Windows. Why should the MS SQL team force people to choose Windows?

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#127

Post by thwd »

sz4kerto wrote: post #92
thwd wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Argumentum ad populum; people just don't know better. Also, I doubt it's really hundreds of millions (of people, as opposed to installs).

What should they 'know'? If they can use it for their purposes then it is, per definition, usable. It's like saying that 'most cars are unusable for getting around'.

They should know that not all cars break down two times a month on average and that black smoke is definitively not a feature.

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#128

Post by lukeh »

polskibus wrote: post #18
Neeek wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought because Kerberos was OS agnostic you could already have Linux interacting with Windows AD?

Microsoft has two extensions to Kerberos, impersonation and delegation. To use WA in a multi-tier set up (app, dB) you need those. I'm not sure if those extensions are available on Linux.

They've been in MIT Kerberos for years now (since 2009 I think?). And at least partly in Heimdal for around the same time.

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#129

Post by CrossWired »

stepik777 wrote: post #96

Interesting, looks like they are using something similar to Wine to run it on Linux.

SQL Server has had its underlying SQLOS since the SQL 2005 rewrite, so the mechanics to port to Linux has been in place for years:

https://blog.sqlauthority.com/2015/11/11/sql-server-what-is-...

Re: How Microsoft brought SQL Server to Linux

#130

Post by j_s »

jmkni wrote: post #93
taspeotis wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's partly a hat-tip to ISVs using .NET. Entity Framework (Core and Desktop) works best with SQL Server, with whole .NET Core is cross-platform thing they let ISVs sell to Linux shops too. The alternative would be to mix EF with PostgreSQL or (horror of horrors) MySQL which is a pain-in-the-ass for testing/QA. ORMs are leaky abstractions! If you're ponying up for a SQL Server license you can afford to pony u…

At our place, we use ServiceStack with OrmLite, which runs well on .net core and plays nicely with MySQL. You can switch between SQL Server and MySQL by changing just one line of code.

So it is worth $250/seat + $175/yr renewal?

I haven't looked at much ServiceStack stuff because of the cost.

Post reply on HN