New car, ancient tires – how the vendor botched you on performance
It’s time for the Software Vendors (ISV for short) to step up their game about which SQL Server release they support. The fresh Release of SQL Server 2017 is an indicator of the need for Vendors and customers to change their game.
Too many times the vendor had the last say about which version of SQL Server to run. I’ve been ordered to install both SQL Server 2012 and SQL Server 2008 R2, neither of them are in mainstream support now.
Vendors put the customers at a huge risk, just because the software “Hasn’t been tested on a newer version”. Well, it’s time to face the fact: the world evolves and so do Microsoft software. As a customer, you must take charge of the situation and at the procurement stage demand support for SQL Server 2016 and beyond. (No SQL2016+ = No Contract) vendors and customers MUST and NEED to step up the game now and together face the future which lies ahead.
New versions of SQL Server will come out in a steady stream now, the five-year gap between 2000 and 2005 is long forgotten. So, all of us must be on our toes to keep up with new releases. The bright side of this is, if the software survived the jump from SQL2000 to SQL2005, it will likely survive most upgrades since that jump had most breaking changes.
Nowadays a version bump is more or less a road bump that just needs to be tested by the vendor (and customer). You must at least run on a SQL Server version which is WITHIN the Mainstream Support for a couple of more years.With the advent of #GDPR, a lot of the enhancements in SQL Server helps you meet the demands for the mandatory EU directive.
With Microsofts approach to Evergreen IT, there is an expectation to keep the pace with upgrades of OS:es, Middleware and even third party software; this also applies to SQL Server, it’s not a coincidence that Microsoft increased the speed of upgrades of SQL Server. In a world that moves towards a containerized delivery of software and services, we can’t expect to be held back by an arcane demand derived from neglect to properly test software.
Would you like to buy a new Porsche and not be able to run it faster than 70Km/h since the car makers demands you to use E-rated tires? I didn’t think so; but this is what happens when the vendors carelessness with SQL versions are let loose, so why accept a vendor demanding SQL2012 (or even 2008 R2)?
Why would you want to miss features as: improved always on, in memory OLTP, vastly improved query optimizer, QUERY STORE (Oh Query Store I’ll write a ballad for thou!), a great deal of data security enhancements?
I’ve been working on both sides, I know it’s hard to push a whole development team to embrace new versions of such small and “unimportant thing” as SQL Servers, when there are thousands of other things to take care of.
Nowadays it’s rarely or never a breaking change to go to the next version. I’m totally aware about customers sometimes demands to run the software using old SQL Hotels or that horrible IT Policies demands stone age software. We both have a responsibility to never stop pushing the development forward
SO? Do you want the NEW Michelin Pilot Sport 4 or retreaded no name tires? The choice is yours, but with better tires come better security and higher possible speeds.
#sqlserver #passsummit #Sqlsaturday #dba #porsche #ISV #software #vendor