These cumulative updates provide many improvements and fixes. SQL Server includes many new Database Engine features, enhancements, and performance improvements. These include:. SQL Server developers now have access to the extensive Python ML and AI libraries available in the open-source ecosystem, along with the latest innovations from Microsoft:.
Did you know that you can edit SQL content yourself? If you do so, not only do you help improve our documentation, but you also get credited as a contributor to the page. Feedback will be sent to Microsoft: By pressing the submit button, your feedback will be used to improve Microsoft products and services. Privacy policy. Akash Garg Updated date Apr 10, Its have unlimited concurrent connections.
Data visualization is available by which we can take snapshot of data. It Use 48 bit precision for Spatial Calculation. This Server Have high availability and disaster recovery factor has been introduced which duplicates the data and rapidly recovers the loss. Good Post, But my opinion is please be using SQL server and it is consider as most stable database engine.
All of their latest versions are just a fancy wordings. But none of them are working as per the expectations. We recently faced a count query issue on our largest table after creating non clustered column store index. The table actual row count was 1 billion but after index creation it returned with 40 billion as a count. We will not accept mistakes in basic things like select count with incorrect results, this will impact the business.
Still SQL server have no improvement in table partitioning, still always on supports with full recovery model, enabling legacy estimator in database scoped configuration for queries running well in older database version. Running durable memory optimized count query result duration is similar to normal table count duration. When comes to large volume those fancy will not work as per the expectations. We are using SQL server sp1 enterprise edition.
The problems we are facing are our realtime issues, those are not received by surfing any websites. When come to performance majority of the stored procedures are running behind and in Thanks for agreeing. When we are planning to go with latest version the features projected by product vendors will not produce incorrect results.
Cardinality estimation is one of the major problem. We have objects works well up to after execution durations increased and tempdb and db logs are running out of storage, enabling legacy estimation on or change db compatibility level to resolving our problem. Now SQL server released and also preparing for In that case we all prefer to go with , think about companies migrated to will pay additional cost for Microsoft should consider their customers when releasing latest versions. Releasing cu is different than version release.
If possible kindly refer niko post and search my name I was describing my problem and niko also agreed.. So — I made that happen. You can click Consulting at the top of this page for that kind of help. Hi Timothy King, No need to fear about end of support. As a Microsoft SQL Server DBA , we raised a support ticket to Microsoft support team for a major bug in non clustered column store index in version SP2 due to our internal security policies restrictions we are unable to bring the support team to diagnose our server.
Because the team will install some diagnostic software and collect logs from our server, as per the policy we have so many restrictions and unable to proceed further, in that case we are unable to utilize the support. Better to use a stable version of SQL server, I believe or consider as a stable versions, to my experience new versions of SQL server are concentrated in cross platform technologies for analytics workload, most of the existing queries running well in are running with degraded performance due to the latest cardinality estimation and optimizer enhancements, Even Microsoft accepted this as a bug and provide workaround like this, enable legacy cardinality estimation on, use query hint for the specific query blocks, change sql server compatibility to something like this.
But one thing we need to consider in future if there is very limited scope to bring other data source data for processing in your environment means we can run with older version of SQL server.
Existing features requires lot of improvements but Microsoft is not looking such things and releasing versions like a movie. If i am explains multiple items then people may thing i am surfing from internet and write those but not like that these are all our real time issues we faced.
Please stick with your stable SQL server version for your continuous application support without any escalations. A year later, is the your advise still to stay with SQL? For example, how many people actually know what the permanent changes to TempDB in the form of making TF functionality no longer optional for TempDB are? All 8 files automatically tried to grow to 25GB. The only way to recover that space is to rebuild the related heap or index. The only way to overcome the problem without changing code is to use TF We have SSRS reports too.
Also, do you recommend using compatibility mode? No much to gain but can upgrade by changing the compat mode. Love to hear your opinion on this. There are no new features we wish to take advantage of at this time , just want to push out the time to the next upgrade , hot diggity! I am the DBA so would like to go , but dev feels we should go to It reminds me of the RTM for , which was just awful.
Thanks for your post, Brent. How about upgrade to from where you are. Consider it base camp for the next upgrade. You will be in striking distance of the next upgrade and can hang with for years if you want. Looking for ammunition to push back against management who hears we are running on while the calendar will soon say Typically, change equals risk.
It continues to work, only more efficiently. Normally, the reverse has been true every time a new version comes out. I used to wait for SP1 but , , and now changed all that. If I can afford to do so, I try to quietly lag behind by at lease 1 version. If you remember all the horror in until they finally fixed most of their regression mistakes in SP3, you know why I take such a position. I had a very good experience with the hole thing, for example, Always-on, for example is great, very powerfull tech, I am also involved in RDBMS radical migration, only a few, from Oracle to Sql-Server, due to Management decisions for lowering license costs and this also were a success.
And if someone is only using Web Edition features, how does that affect your recommendation? A noticeable change between and is the capabilities of graph databases. You can directed graphs in using edge constraints and it protects against deleting nodes with edges, things not in Great Article! We have some Databases in and , and were in the final phase of testing with SS, and in one particular database we use a lot of UDF and TVF, the performance in these database is in average 1.
Already tried every configuration possible in the server, disabling inling in some functions helped, but most of the functions are lot inlineable! Probably will Go to SS! The way Unicode characters are hashed in sql until SQL Server was not consistent with hash made in Python or other languages. So if you hashed your data vault keys with sql server and you want to integrate that with data stored outside of sql say in a datalake, and your hashing values had Danish letters for instance, then the same key will have two different hash values.
Hello, We have now 11 CUs for and almost 2 years sice its release. What is the big blocker with SQL to go to production? Is there something specific that is dangerous at this moment?
Please consider that is almost out of mainstream support and only and will have full support. Hello, I had the feeling that you do not recommend it at all, but it seems I am not entirely right after I read carefully: In our case we have all the issues that SQL suppose to fix. Even we are facing last-page contention on some tables. I hope to have more benefits than negatives.
We aim to go to Prod Q4 If anyone else does the migration, it would sure be nice if you good folks would reply on this thread with the same vigor and detail to let the rest of us know how things worked out.
I do hate supporting multiple SQL Server versions. Its difficult to implement new features, then do a separate cut for older versions. It would be nice if a patch to older versions would allow ignoring syntax specific to new versions when possible. A patched build would recognize this as a valid syntax, and then ignore it.
I still doubt.
0コメント