newsgrps
newsgrps at dalyn.co.nz
Wed Jun 22 03:20:05 CDT 2011
I have suggested that the company quiz the Audit firm for their reasons. Will let you know if we get a reply. David At 22/06/2011, Mark Breen wrote: >Hello David and Francisco, > >About 6 months ago, I was asked to connect to a SQL Server database on a >live working box. > >I was able to detach and attach the db on another server, but I wanted to >connect while it was on the existing server. > >I did not know the password for the SQL instance. > >At the time, I spent 20 - 30 minutes reading about cracking the password on >SQL server and there were a lot of interesting articles on that topic - in >fact it was not important to crack the database, but the reason I spent the >20 - 30 mins was because the reading was interesting. > >It seemed to me that it is easy enough to crack a password in SQL 2005 - but >it also seems that MS changed that for SQL 2008. Perhaps this is one reason >that the IT audit company raised it. > >In David's case, there the server is already 2008, and only the single db >compatability level is 2005, I would love to hear why the audit company >wants it upgraded? I bet they have no idea why, and when they are informed >that the server is already at 2008 - and so the enhanced security is already >in place - they probably have no real idea why they are hassling you. > >There must be a special word for this situation - people that portray >importantance with no substance, or at least with less substance than they >present. What I hate is that they introduce enough FUD to cause us to >change our compatabiltiy levels from SQL 90 to SQL 100. > >Mark > > > > > > > > >On 21 June 2011 22:31, Francisco Tapia <fhtapia at gmail.com> wrote: > > > yes, just changing the compatibility level will change what is needed for > > the database and allows you access to all the newer sql server 2008 > > features. the advantage is that you are more compatible with the current > > engine. As Microsoft moves forward you will have features supported in > > previous version of sql server deprecated or behave oddly, to help avoid > > odd > > behavior you'd normally update to the current compatibility level. Other > > than syntax and the newer sql 2008 features I don't know what else would be > > the pressing issue unless the company runs scripts specifically targeted at > > a specific database version. > > > > > > -Francisco > > http://bit.ly/sqlthis | Tsql and More... > > http://db.tt/JeXURAx | Drop Box, Storage in the Cloud (free) > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 1:33 PM, newsgrps <newsgrps at dalyn.co.nz> wrote: > > > > > Team, > > > > > > I have an SQL 2005 database that has been attached to SQL2008. > > Everything > > > runs fine. > > > > > > An IT audit company has made the following recommendation: > > > > > > "A review of the databases has highlighted that the database "StockData4" > > > is SQL 90 which is the SQL 2005 compatibility level (SQL 2008 > > compatibility > > > level should be 100). It is recommended that an upgrade of the database > > > StockData4 with the correct compatibility level be undertaken." > > > > > > From what I have read this just involves changing the databases > > > compatibility level setting. Apart from being able to use features > > > introduced in SQL2008, is there any other advantage to the change? Are > > > there any disadvantages? Is there anything else that might be affected > > by > > > the change that I should know now and fix? > > > > > > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list > > > dba-SQLServer@**databaseadvisors.com <dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com > > > > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/**mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver< > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver> > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.**com <http://www.databaseadvisors.com> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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