April 28, 2009 at 9:18 am
Hello,
I'm working on building a business case to migrate to SQL2008. (We have been running SQL2000 very comfortably for many years.) Does anyone know where I can find information related to ROI, cost savings, risk avoidance, etc. related to SQL2008? I understand the technical benefits of upgrading but need to support the business reasons. Any thoughts you have would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
April 28, 2009 at 9:38 am
Policy management. Figure out how much you spend on configuration costs. How much risk there is if configuration was changed. Policy management solves that. 🙂
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley
April 28, 2009 at 9:39 am
Check out http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/spotlight-on-cost.aspx for some information.
I would also happily mention that ROI will be instant the first time that you have an issue bearing in mind that you won't get any support on SQL2000.
April 28, 2009 at 11:34 am
Since SQL Server 2000 is off the main stream support path, how about the fact that if a mandatory security patch comes out that breaks 2000, you can't count on getting support from MS? That convinced people around my company PDQ to start the process.
----------------------------------------------------The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood... Theodore RooseveltThe Scary DBAAuthor of: SQL Server 2017 Query Performance Tuning, 5th Edition and SQL Server Execution Plans, 3rd EditionProduct Evangelist for Red Gate Software
April 28, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Thanks for the feedback. Much appreciated.
I'm thinking that compression will reduce the cost of disk space and tape backups over time, and perhaps eliminate third-party compression software.
Does anyone know what the performance boost is over SQL2000. I recall hearing 35%, but I am not sure.
Thanks.
April 28, 2009 at 2:34 pm
The performance boost depends greatly on what you're doing.
The boost from moving away from OLE automation to using CLR is huge, if you do that.
The boost related to migrating adjacency hierarchies can also be huge.
Simple queries on relatively straightforward tables, using covering indexes, not so huge.
It depends on what you're doing and how you're doing it.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
May 6, 2009 at 9:23 am
From my view, what I see and read,
1. support is the big one.
2. some performance improvement in the core db engine.
3. Compression is EE only. Need to factor that in. If you're Standard edition, third party products are often a better buy.
4. If you could change hardware as part of your cycle, then going to 64-bit, and consolidating some instances might save you.
However, I'm not sold there is a great case for basic 2000 instances that are working well.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
May 7, 2009 at 6:54 am
Thanks for the reply.
Selling the business on performance imporvements and enhancements is difficult especially in a down economy. SQL2000 has preformed well for us over the years and continues to meet the needs of the business. With SQL2008 we are leveraging support and compression as well as consolidation. However, the need is to demonstrate immediate ROI. We are running SQL2000 enterprise on several servers with multiple processors. Both hardware and software need to be replaced. So for us, the cost to upgrade is substantial.
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply