Voice of the DBA

Tag: patching

  • Servicing SQL Server in the Future

    Service Packs have become the way that many of us patch the various Microsoft products we use. Many administrators find patching to be time consuming and difficult to justify, even for security patches, and as a result, often wait for a Service Pack before they inform clients and schedule testing. Most people used to always wait for Service Pack 1 before installing a new version of a server product, but I don’t think that’s necessary anymore. The quality of Microsoft server products has gone up quite a bit in the last 5 years.

    However, I don’t like the way that the servicing, or patching, of products has evolved. For SQL Server, we get patches every other month, known as Cumulative Updates. Exchange Server has also moved to this format, though it seems many of the other server products (Windows Server, Sharepoint, System Center, etc) still release Service Packs. A few years ago it was rumored that Microsoft would not release Service Pack 3 for SQL Server 2005. A number of us voted on this patch and it was eventually released.

    The strategy announced at that time was that SQL Server would receive a service pack 6 months after the RTM release and thereafter annual service packs until support expired for the product. In between, Cumulative Updates would be released. That seemed to be the case for a few years, but once again Microsoft seems to have quietly decided not to move forward with Service Packs. We’ve been getting cumulative updates, but no service packs in over a year and a half. The last SPs we have are SP1 for 2012 (Nov 2012), SP2 for 2008 R2 (July 2012), and SP3 for 2008 (Oct 2011).

    If you’re like to express your opinion, take a moment and vote for these items:

    It just takes a moment to click on them, and I’d also ask that you pass along the URL (or this editorial) to friends that work with SQL Server.

    Personally I’d also like to see a solid strategy moving forward that includes annual service packs, especially with a 2 year release cycle. I know some of my fellow MVPs and writers like the CU strategy and wish more people would adopt it, but I don’t agree. It’s time consuming to test and prepare for updates, and as long as this paragraph appears on CU pages, I do not think we should recommend CUs to DBAs.

    “This cumulative package is intended to correct only the problems that are described in this article. Apply it only to systems that are experiencing these specific problems. The updates in this package may receive additional testing. Therefore, if you are not severely affected by any of these problems, we recommend that you wait for the next SQL Server 2012 service pack that contains the hotfixes in this package.”

    To me that shows even Microsoft doesn’t completely want to stand behind their cumulative updates.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcast

    Listen to the MP3 Audio ( 3.7MB) podcast or subscribe to the feed at iTunes and Mevio . feed

    The Voice of the DBA podcast features music by Everyday Jones. No relation, but I stumbled on to them and really like the music. Support this great duo at www.everydayjones.com.

  • The Patch Wild, Wild West

    The wild, wild west, immortalized in so many movies, was very chaotic. Not what I want in a patching process.
    The wild, wild west, immortalized in so many movies, was very chaotic. Not what I want in a patching process.

    I’ve had various iOS devices over the last few years and one thing that’s annoyed me is the patching process. I have very little control over which patches I install, and I can’t roll back patches if I get a new version of an application that doesn’t seem to work well. As a result, I’m glad I have control over when I patch particular apps, and patch them rarely. This isn’t the best security process, but it provides stability, which is usually more important to me on my devices.

    It seems to have worked well for Apple, which has sold billions of applications across their devices. It works so well that Microsoft seems to have adopted a new process for the “Metro” style applications for devices and Windows 8. According to this article, the “Black Tuesday” for patches might be going away. All of the things I don’t like about the iOS patch system seem to be coming to Metro apps. I wouldn’t care, but since Windows Server 2012 has some of the Windows 8 characteristics, I’m a little concerned. Are we doomed to get more “Metro” style interfaces for Windows features and potentially third party applications that will send patches mixed in with enhancements? Will we get stuck “upgrading” systems with new features in order to get security patches?

    Consumers want things to work, and I can understand Microsoft’s desire to simplify the patch process, but removing the ability to roll back and not warning users of patches could backfire with companies that end up using these same devices. This most assuredly makes the process of publishing and distributing patches easier for Microsoft, but it’s a big step backward for companies, and it’s one that I’m sure will upset, anger, and frustrate both users and IT departments.

    The world continues to abstract away from particular platforms for any purpose. Those of us using SQL Server are stuck with Windows, but many of the applications we use are increasingly being released on multiple platforms. If Microsoft is having issues with Windows 8, Windows phone, and Windows RT adoption, this is a sure way to continue the problems. Other ecosystems might not be any better, but if that’s the case, then wouldn’t you consider iOS, Android or something else?

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcasts

    We publish three versions of the podcast each day for you to enjoy.