To me its quite amazing that in 2016 we have a fully approved & supported Windows kernel running in linux and a linux kernel running in Windows. Makes me rethink the definition of what an OS really is.
MSSQL on Linux – the details
31–40 of 59 posts
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#32Any valid use cases? No offence, was just wondering why would anybody use it...
Porting existing/legacy software to cloud. Though SQL Server is just a part of the stack and you still can't fool software it's running Windows. But it's like SQL Server on Windows Server Nano - nobody asks for it, because only full system has required tools and features.
SQL Server on Nano is hard to install properly - MS didn't think about how to install SQLS on Windows without a GUI. Docker is the only usable way that doesn't take hours.
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#33user space version of the NT kernel (known as NTUM - "user mode NT") This is pretty neat. Wonder if people could use it to run other Windows stuff on Linux Edit: formatting
I wonder if the license for that only allows running specific applications.
The PAL runner is actually locked down to run SQL Server only ;-)
Trying to run another app, even reg or cmd, currently makes AppLoader crash.
(AppLoader is the first .exe that is ran in the NTUM)
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
MSSQL still doesn't have replication on Linux. Here's one data scientists hillarious take on the difference between MSSQL and Postgres: https://www.pg-versus-ms.com/
MSSQL is in the very new process of actually becoming available on Linux. Give'em a bit of time at least.
I'm rather biased, I'll freely admit that. Having deployed some number of Django on PG solutions (some of which deliver moderate req/s) I will gravitate there just on experience alone.
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#35user space version of the NT kernel (known as NTUM - "user mode NT") This is pretty neat. Wonder if people could use it to run other Windows stuff on Linux Edit: formatting
That's like an official implementation of WINE from Microsoft.
It's much more complete than Wine, it actually has the whole Windows graphics stack running, outputting over RDP ;)
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#36MS SQL Server database is a very old codebase. It dates back to Sybase SQL Server database (1980). Microsoft licensed and forked Sybase SQL in late 1980s and early 1990s and branded t as MS SQL Server. The strategic manoeuvre to get this database and basically got rid of a major vendor is not uncommon for MSFT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Microsoft_SQL_Serve... and additional background info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashton-Tate . Little has changed in the comming years, MS SQL kept the old SQL syntax for decades. Some interesting improvements came from the WinFS and XML teams (like full text search and refactoring to allow leaner editions - at one point it was planned to ship SQL Server (desktop ed) with Vista as part of WinFS update). Only recently with SQL Server 2014/2016 the very old and crufty syntax got some improvements. Or things like international date formats - remember it's a codebase from he 1980s, be happy with four non-standard non-ISO formats - things are getting better, but parts of the codebase slept for like 20 years with little love.
On Linux there are Oracle, DB2, Postgres, MySQL, ... and in near future MSSQL too. Depending on the use case, choose wisely. There are many nice features in all of these databases, and several little documented dark edges that you better know about.
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#37To me its quite amazing that in 2016 we have a fully approved & supported Windows kernel running in linux and a linux kernel running in Windows. Makes me rethink the definition of what an OS really is.
unless it's the good ol` Embrace & Extend & Extinguish. it's here now, but i'd wait and see where this goes. we're lucky we still have linus.
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#38Any valid use cases? No offence, was just wondering why would anybody use it...
Anyone using MSSQL that doesn't want to keep spending on windows licenses.
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Any valid use cases? I'm personally a fully competent Linux sysadmin, and an extremely incompetent Windows sysadmin. SQL Server is great, I love .NET, and the only thing holding me back all these years has been the Windows system requirement.
I consider myself a first-rate Linux sysadmin, and a perfectly competent Windows sysadmin as well, but this is a position I can't wrap my head around. If you're willing to pay thousands of dollars for a properly-licensed SQL Server install, why do you care if it needs to run on Windows? I would normally assume you don't want the license cost of the OS, but it's a tiny fraction of the overall licensing cost. The only…
> Even then, why not just run it on your Windows dev machine?
A lot of devs don't understand/like windows enough to work on it. It's probably a lot easier to find *nix devs that windows devs.
Re: MSSQL on Linux – the details
#40Are there links to licensing costs? Are there regular client access license costs as well? So... if there are costs for licensing, then converting from postgresql to mssql is a little harder to swallow.
AFAIK, the costs and editions will be the same as in SQL 2016 (i.e. Express, Web, Standard, Enterprise).
This is correct. SQL Server licensing is not changed. The major benefit is being able to share a single infrastructural OS for application and DB - it is not uncommon to see Linux app environment and Windows DB environment in a lot of large organizations.
The secondary benefit is removing the Windows OS licensing cost.