Hell just froze over: MSFT announces SQL Server on Linux



  • Extending SQL Server to Also Now Run on Linux

    Today I’m excited to announce our plans to bring SQL Server to Linux as well. This will enable SQL Server to deliver a consistent data platform across Windows Server and Linux, as well as on-premises and cloud. We are bringing the core relational database capabilities to preview today, and are targeting availability in mid-2017.

    SQL Server on Linux will provide customers with even more flexibility in their data solution. One with mission-critical performance, industry-leading TCO, best-in-class security, and hybrid cloud innovations – like Stretch Database which lets customers access their data on-premises and in the cloud whenever they want at low cost – all built in.

    “This is an enormously important decision for Microsoft, allowing it to offer its well-known and trusted database to an expanded set of customers”, said Al Gillen, group vice president, enterprise infrastructure, at IDC. “By taking this key product to Linux Microsoft is proving its commitment to being a cross platform solution provider. This gives customers choice and reduces the concerns for lock-in. We would expect this will also accelerate the overall adoption of SQL Server.”

    Source: Microsoft





  • Damn you beat me to it. I was just about to post this.

    Hopefully they simplify the licensing.



  • Does this mean we'll be able to do apt-get install sqlserver?



  • That would be nice, but knowing Microsoft, they'll use a custom installer and it will take a dump on your system.



  • Error: Cannot locate /usr/home/Program Files (x86)

    Please reinstall Windows.



  • I CANNOT figure out Microsoft's game plan any more. They are all over the map lately. I think they are trying the "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" strategy right now o_O


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    Oh, how bad could it be? We'll just have to add /C/Program Files(x86)/Microsoft to PATH...



  • Huh. I was sure they'd wait to announce this until three weeks from Friday.



  • @Vaire said:

    I CANNOT figure out Microsoft's game plan any more.

    Try to squash Oracle, MySQL, MariaDB and PostgreSQL?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    More Oracle than the others.

    Once this happens, there will be exactly zero defensible reason to use Oracle in new development.



  • Well ... I mean ... that goes without saying. The important question is, what do they do when they conquer the world ... and will they serve salad with lunch? The people, DEMAND, answers! >_</*



  • If SQL Server was very popular and Windows was the underdog, it would make sense to keep SQL Server on Windows as a way to force people to buy it. But since it's the other way around, it probably did more harm than good.

    I guess the only reason they did it until now is they had the policy of "pretend that non-Microsoft products don't exist wherever possible", but now that they've abandoned it and gone all cool and open sourcey.



  • Seriously, though, how does SQL Server maintain a configuration? In the Windows registry? Is Microsoft porting over the tools to maintain a Windows registry, or are they going the parse-config-files route?



  • @Vaire said:

    I CANNOT figure out Microsoft's game plan any more. They are all over the map lately. I think they are trying the "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" strategy right now o_O

    The cost of the OS SQL Server runs on was already only a tiny portion of the cost of SQL Server itself.



  • That, my friend, is the only game worth playing.:popcorn:



  • @Captain said:

    Seriously, though, how does SQL Server maintain a configuration? In the Windows registry?

    IIRC, the vast bulk of the config is stored within SQL Server itself.



  • You, are not wrong ;)



  • Creating a layer that'll map Registry data to either a database or plain ol' filesystem files is trivial. That's the LEAST difficult porting challenge.

    Figuring out how it interacts with Linux's memory manager is probably the biggest pain in the ass, considering how optimized it is for Windows' memory manager. Then again, it's also known to kind of say "fuck you" to the OS and do its own thing anyway, so maybe it's not as big a deal as I think.



  • Every SQL Server DBA I have ever known, has told me the exact same thing:
    Any available memory on a server running SQL Server, shall be assimiliated.



  • That is the default setting, but maximum memory usage can easily be configured.

    As far as I know, SQL Server stores its settings in the msdb database.



  • You're just ... you're not playing the game right!
    This is the thunderhyperbole-dome!



  • @Vaire said:

    Any available memory on a server running SQL Server, shall be assimiliated.

    You're suggesting there's DB engines out there that don't do that?


  • area_deu



  • In my experience, at least on the same server with IIS, it's pretty reasonable about balancing its needs with IIS'. The defaults are pretty good.

    Of course it's all configurable, so they might be saying that because they've configured it to run that way.



  • I suggested nothing of the sort. Simply stated the borgified obvious :trolleybus:



  • I have never been able to summon the willpower to be arsed enough to care to look into it. I'll take your word for it ;)



  • I just hope they bring decent CLI management tools for their database. Having only GUI is fucking lame.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    In my experience, at least on the same server with IIS, it's pretty reasonable about balancing its needs with IIS'. The defaults are pretty good.

    Mixing SQL Server with Exchange on the same box is a recipe for disaster though. Exchange happily chews away at available RAM.

    @wft said:

    I just hope they bring decent CLI management tools for their database. Having only GUI is fucking lame.

    AFAIK anything you can do through SSMS can be done with SQL statements. Is that CLI enough for you? :P



  • I think it's a given they'll port sqlcmd over. You can do everything with that.



  • @NedFodder said:

    I was sure they'd wait to announce this until three weeks from Friday.

    Well the've already reserved that date to upload SQL Server to github.com with a copy of the Affero General Public License in the LICENSE file.



  • Then the next day they force-push another LICENSE file with the commit message

    LOL we can't believe you fell for that, of course we'd only ever use WTFPL

  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @gleemonk said:

    Affero General Public License

    elgiu that license with a rusty fork.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election



  • Argh, I even searched. PLZ CLOSE, MODZ. THX.



  • I guess that's neat, Microsoft, but in my experience that isn't how this works. You go all-in with MS services or you pick someone else, or you pick any number of the 10 billion different options for developing web applications and roll your own "stack". Seriously, who is going to run this? It can't be designed for enterprise.. so maybe hobbyists?



  • @aapis said:

    It can't be designed for enterprise..

    Why couldn't it be?



  • You're aware that Azure supports Linux VMs, Node, PHP, and all sorts of non-MS stuff already?



  • Because what enterprise is going to run MSSQL on Linux? They would already be running that shit on Azure, or some self-hosted solution w/Windows Server XXXX. I can't imagine what kind of strange, unprepared, or otherwise totally backwards company would ever consider this.



  • I don't understand your point. None of those things are examples of Microsoft technology running on Linux.



  • I guess that's neat, Microsoft, but in my experience that isn't how this works. You go all-in with MS services or you pick someone else, or you pick any number of the 10 billion different options for developing web applications and roll your own "stack". Seriously, who is going to run this? It can't be designed for enterprise.. so maybe hobbyists?



  • As opposed to ASP.NET and .NET itself, i suppose? Or VSCODE?



  • @aapis said:

    examples of Microsoft technology running on Linux

    https://code.visualstudio.com/



  • @Vaire said:

    I think they are trying the "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" strategy right now o_O

    It seems to have worked for IBM.



  • @sloosecannon said:

    ■■■■■ that license

    It usually works the other way around.

    @sloosecannon said:

    with a rusty fork.

    Yes Affero might just do that.



  • @wft said:

    I just hope they bring decent CLI management tools for their database. Having only GUI is fucking lame.

    The GUI has always been a front-end that simply issues T-SQL commands for you. Back in 1996, I was using SQL Profiler to capture what SQL Enterprise Manager was doing so I could build scripts. Since SQL 2005, the GUI gives you an option to generate a script instead of performing the action for pretty much everything.

    So.... they did exactly what you wanted... more than 20 years ago.



  • Hopefully they fix FreeTDS not to be so fucking broken while at it.



  • @hifi said:

    fix FreeTDS

    Why? Why would MS fix non-MS broken shit?
    If anything the porting of SQL Server will include the porting of the Native Client and ODBC drivers.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @Luhmann said:

    ODBC drivers

    You can connect to MSSQL using ODBC from Linux for ages already.



  • @Vaire said:

    Every SQL Server DBA I have ever known, has told me the exact same thing:Any available memory on a server running SQL Server, shall be assimiliated.

    I learned this hard way on my own skin.
    You do NOT want to host SQL Server + IIS on the same server.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.