Nearly 20% of Microsoft SQL Servers running have passed end of support - eviltoast
  • WagnasT@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I had to deploy a couple MS SQL clusters years ago, I’m fuzzy on the details but for whatever reason we needed a domain admin to enable clustering and instead of following the permissions on the KB they gave up just made the service account a domain admin.

    To this day I’ll never understand why a vendor would choose MS SQL or Oracle if they don’t have a very specific function that they need.

    • expr@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yep. Postgres is fantastic and there’s no justification to use proprietary bullshit like that.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because a lot of applications require MS SQL. And they develop based on this because a lot of clients use MS SQL… and the circle continues.

      • SapientLasagna@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        At least some of the app developers have realized that if they develop for Postgres they get to keep the Sql Server licensing costs for themselves. Windows server licensing costs too, if they’re clever.

        Unfortunately the old janky enterprise shit will probably never get updated. You know the ones. The ones that think they’re new and hip because they support SSO (Radius only)