Wednesday, January 17, 2007

SQL Server 2005

Stick with me on this one:
I've just installed the client tools for SQLServer 2005. I have a small C: drive and needed to install it on my E: drive.
  • I tell the installer to install to e:\program files\Microsoft...
  • It tells me there isn't enough room
  • I check drive e: to see that there is enough room, restart the installer and try again
  • It still fails!
  • I notice there is a button on the installer that will tell me how much disk space it needs
    • it needs 150mb on e:
    • 1.4GB on c:
    • It will install .net 2.0, visual studio developer and a whole lot more on the c: drive and I cannot change it
  • I uninstall a couple of applications and move them to the e: drive
  • I get enough room on my c: drive(just)
  • It installs


All I want to do is set up a regular backup on the database. It's is simple on the previous versions of SQLServer, but on 2005 it isn't.
I end up using the maintenance wizard to build a job that will back up the database. At the end it tells me that 1) The T-SQL isn't the real T-SQL that it will run as I have asked for weird configurations and 2) It cannot save the job as their is an error. It's a fucking wizard, I typed and selected nothing, just clicked 'next' a lot.
I think I have got it running but I've used a large number of versions of SQLServer and one of the good things about it is the minimal time it takes to dump a large database. In this version it is taking forever.


In summary SQLServer adds very little to the database engine, server, whatever, just a lot of added crap to the extras and uses a hugh amount of disc space to achieve it.
I really hate Microsoft; SQLServer was their only worthwhile product but it now appears the SQLServer development team has been infiltrated by the marketing code bloaters.


Word to the wise, a database server serves data! Add tools to make backup easier and you are away.
MySQL must be very happy with SQLServer 2005 as it's just another good reason to migrate to MySQL.

PS: The JTDS JDBC driver still talks to it, which is one thing.

Labels: , , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home