From gustav at cactus.dk  Tue Mar  8 04:06:37 2016
From: gustav at cactus.dk (Gustav Brock)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 10:06:37 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Who would have believed this?
Message-ID: <VI1PR06MB15848D6931D31B888773C12DCAB20@VI1PR06MB1584.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>

Hi all

I didn't, but here it is:

     http://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2016/03/07/announcing-sql-server-on-linux/

/gustav

From accessd at shaw.ca  Tue Mar  8 17:38:12 2016
From: accessd at shaw.ca (Jim Lawrence)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 16:38:12 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Who would have believed this?
In-Reply-To: <VI1PR06MB15848D6931D31B888773C12DCAB20@VI1PR06MB1584.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <240937550.34512692.1457480292806.JavaMail.root@shaw.ca>

Hi Gustav:

About time and one of the smartest moves Microsoft has done. :-)

Jim

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gustav Brock" <gustav at cactus.dk>
To: "Discussion concerning MS SQL Server (dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com)" <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>, "Discussion of Hardware and Software issues" <dba-tech at databaseadvisors.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 8, 2016 2:06:37 AM
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Who would have believed this?

Hi all

I didn't, but here it is:

     http://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2016/03/07/announcing-sql-server-on-linux/

/gustav
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com


From fhtapia at gmail.com  Thu Mar 10 22:24:07 2016
From: fhtapia at gmail.com (fhtapia at gmail.com)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 04:24:07 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Who would have believed this?
In-Reply-To: <240937550.34512692.1457480292806.JavaMail.root@shaw.ca>
References: <VI1PR06MB15848D6931D31B888773C12DCAB20@VI1PR06MB1584.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
	<240937550.34512692.1457480292806.JavaMail.root@shaw.ca>
Message-ID: <CAP+kXmbj6at+dicpAAMx_NjGhG0_PYkAWTLxtY4WkBaZE0VZFg@mail.gmail.com>

+1 can hardly wait to get my hands on it :)
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 3:48 PM Jim Lawrence <accessd at shaw.ca> wrote:

> Hi Gustav:
>
> About time and one of the smartest moves Microsoft has done. :-)
>
> Jim
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gustav Brock" <gustav at cactus.dk>
> To: "Discussion concerning MS SQL Server (
> dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com)" <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com>,
> "Discussion of Hardware and Software issues" <
> dba-tech at databaseadvisors.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 8, 2016 2:06:37 AM
> Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Who would have believed this?
>
> Hi all
>
> I didn't, but here it is:
>
>
> http://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2016/03/07/announcing-sql-server-on-linux/
>
> /gustav
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>

From fuller.artful at gmail.com  Wed Mar 30 05:00:26 2016
From: fuller.artful at gmail.com (Arthur Fuller)
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 06:00:26 -0400
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL 2016 Community Preview
Message-ID: <CAEPJO1iPVVAj693pZTT9sY9Seunv6YBSq_36qp8JFDtoQ5JHHw@mail.gmail.com>

Anyone who's played with SQL 2014's in-memory tables was no doubt
frustrated by the option's rather severe limitations. Good news. SQL 2016
has removed almost all the limitations, replacing them with a couple of
design-time settings. But all in all, it's a huge win, and makes it
possible, given enough RAM, to make an entire OLTP database live in RAM.
Needless to say, the performance gain would be significant. Obviously, one
would have to schedule the writes back to disk, or risk losing the
in-memory transactions in the event of system failure or accidental
shutdown. But those are merely planning issues. For a little more
information, click here
<http://www.vertabelo.com/blog/technical-articles/exploring-sql-server-2016-powerful-new-features>
.

-- 
Arthur

From darryl at whittleconsulting.com.au  Wed Mar 30 22:55:53 2016
From: darryl at whittleconsulting.com.au (Darryl Collins)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 03:55:53 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL 2016 Community Preview
In-Reply-To: <CAEPJO1iPVVAj693pZTT9sY9Seunv6YBSq_36qp8JFDtoQ5JHHw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEPJO1iPVVAj693pZTT9sY9Seunv6YBSq_36qp8JFDtoQ5JHHw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ME1PR01MB019488CF5E0681BA7D40F6F2FC990@ME1PR01MB0194.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>

Thanks Arthur, that looks interesting.  Any word if the 'in memory tables' are going to be available in the Express version of SQL 2016?
In my situation, the risk of data loss wouldn't  be an issue as SQL Server is merely used as a way of converting a large txt file into a series of outputs.  If it all failed nothing would be lost, so the performance gain is attractive and desirable.

Cheers
Darryl.

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-SQLServer [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Arthur Fuller
Sent: 30 March, 2016 9:00 PM
To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL 2016 Community Preview

Anyone who's played with SQL 2014's in-memory tables was no doubt frustrated by the option's rather severe limitations. Good news. SQL 2016 has removed almost all the limitations, replacing them with a couple of design-time settings. But all in all, it's a huge win, and makes it possible, given enough RAM, to make an entire OLTP database live in RAM.
Needless to say, the performance gain would be significant. Obviously, one would have to schedule the writes back to disk, or risk losing the in-memory transactions in the event of system failure or accidental shutdown. But those are merely planning issues. For a little more information, click here <http://www.vertabelo.com/blog/technical-articles/exploring-sql-server-2016-powerful-new-features>
.

--
Arthur
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com



From jlawrenc1 at shaw.ca  Thu Mar 31 10:39:28 2016
From: jlawrenc1 at shaw.ca (Jim Lawrence)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 09:39:28 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL 2016 Community Preview
In-Reply-To: <CAEPJO1iPVVAj693pZTT9sY9Seunv6YBSq_36qp8JFDtoQ5JHHw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <51844526.11189416.1459438768592.JavaMail.root@shaw.ca>

Hi Arthur:

It looks like a great set of features. Oracle had memory table support back as far as version 10 (2004) and it was fully featured by version 11 and 12.

Ms looks like it has pulled ahead a bit. Are there beta version available yet?

Jim
 
----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Arthur Fuller" <fuller.artful at gmail.com> 
To: "Discussion concerning MS SQL Server" <dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 3:00:26 AM 
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] SQL 2016 Community Preview 

Anyone who's played with SQL 2014's in-memory tables was no doubt 
frustrated by the option's rather severe limitations. Good news. SQL 2016 
has removed almost all the limitations, replacing them with a couple of 
design-time settings. But all in all, it's a huge win, and makes it 
possible, given enough RAM, to make an entire OLTP database live in RAM. 
Needless to say, the performance gain would be significant. Obviously, one 
would have to schedule the writes back to disk, or risk losing the 
in-memory transactions in the event of system failure or accidental 
shutdown. But those are merely planning issues. For a little more 
information, click here 
<http://www.vertabelo.com/blog/technical-articles/exploring-sql-server-2016-powerful-new-features> 
. 

-- 
Arthur 
_______________________________________________ 
dba-SQLServer mailing list 
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com 
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver 
http://www.databaseadvisors.com