4 ms·

I think this is great because other apps like SQL Server, VS etc will now come onto the *nix stack. And there is a ton of demand for that. I for one love SQL Se

I think this is great because other apps like SQL Server, VS etc will now come onto the *nix stack. And there is a ton of demand for that. I for one love SQL Server.

darklajid 12y ago
I'm confused. How's SQL Server related to .Net? Put differently: What does the SQL Server gain by .Net being available for other platforms? Are there any announcements to port SQL Server?
- politician 12y ago
  At the very least, CoreCLR could bring robust SQL Server client drivers to Linux/OSX.
- curiousDog 12y ago
  SQL Server is actually a CLR host and this functionality is heavily used by existing apps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_CLR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_CLR). And no, I don't think an announcement has been made. However, this shows that it might be possible!
- ximeng 12y ago
  I asked an MS dev evangelist about that and he said SQL Server was likely to be the slowest to move across and open up as it's practically its own operating system and the team are isolated and conservative.
Alupis 12y ago
> SQL Server, VS etc will now come onto the *nix stack. And there is a ton of demand for that Doubtful SQL Server on the 'nix stack has much demand nor will it gain traction. In all OS' not Windows... Oracle, PostgreSQL and MySQL/MariaDB dominate. Not because SQL Server isn't available, but because they are all very solid very good SQL servers.
- WorldWideWayne 12y ago
  The tools for working with those are nowhere near as easy to use or comprehensive and streamlined as the SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) and SQL Server Data Tools (SSDT) / Visual Studio. I doubt they're as robust either. PostgreSQL doesn't even support returning multiple heterogeneous result-sets at the driver level.
  - mistermann 12y ago
    Maybe I'm just not doing anything interesting (on SQL Server), but I'd appreciate you expanding on why you think it's superior. "PostgreSQL doesn't even support returning multiple heterogeneous result-sets at the driver level." - I'm not even sure what that means exactly.
    - philliphaydon 12y ago
      SQL Server supports returning multiple result sets, i.e select * from Product select * from Category Then in C# you can pull out 2 different result sets and get two different collections. With 1 call to the database. So no round trips. PostgreSQL supports multiple result sets if they contain the same columns. But the drivers don't support them. :(
      - Alupis 12y ago
        Seems like you ought to be doing a JOIN here, otherwise your're returning completely un-related result sets and crunching them in your app logic. It's usually best to let the DB do the data crunching and just return out what you need.
        WorldWideWayne 12y ago
        It was a trivial example. Are you saying that you never write code that needs multiple un-related, un-joinable sets of data out of the database? Even with this example - I need a list of all products and I need a list of all categories... Joining them means I have to write client code to split them up again for display. In any case, I use this tactic a lot for CRUD apps and it makes everything quicker when I can call one stored procedure and get back 7 lists of stuff that I need to display on my page.

I think this is great because other apps like SQL Server, VS etc will now come onto the *nix stack. And there is a ton of demand for that. I for one love SQL Server.

darklajid 12y ago

I'm confused. How's SQL Server related to .Net? Put differently: What does the SQL Server gain by .Net being available for other platforms? Are there any announcements to port SQL Server?

politician 12y ago
At the very least, CoreCLR could bring robust SQL Server client drivers to Linux/OSX.
curiousDog 12y ago
SQL Server is actually a CLR host and this functionality is heavily used by existing apps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_CLR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_CLR). And no, I don't think an announcement has been made. However, this shows that it might be possible!
ximeng 12y ago
I asked an MS dev evangelist about that and he said SQL Server was likely to be the slowest to move across and open up as it's practically its own operating system and the team are isolated and conservative.

Alupis 12y ago

> SQL Server, VS etc will now come onto the *nix stack. And there is a ton of demand for that Doubtful SQL Server on the 'nix stack has much demand nor will it gain traction. In all OS' not Windows... Oracle, PostgreSQL and MySQL/MariaDB dominate. Not because SQL Server isn't available, but because they are all very solid very good SQL servers.

WorldWideWayne 12y ago
The tools for working with those are nowhere near as easy to use or comprehensive and streamlined as the SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) and SQL Server Data Tools (SSDT) / Visual Studio. I doubt they're as robust either. PostgreSQL doesn't even support returning multiple heterogeneous result-sets at the driver level.
- mistermann 12y ago
  Maybe I'm just not doing anything interesting (on SQL Server), but I'd appreciate you expanding on why you think it's superior. "PostgreSQL doesn't even support returning multiple heterogeneous result-sets at the driver level." - I'm not even sure what that means exactly.
  - philliphaydon 12y ago
    SQL Server supports returning multiple result sets, i.e select * from Product select * from Category Then in C# you can pull out 2 different result sets and get two different collections. With 1 call to the database. So no round trips. PostgreSQL supports multiple result sets if they contain the same columns. But the drivers don't support them. :(
    - Alupis 12y ago
      Seems like you ought to be doing a JOIN here, otherwise your're returning completely un-related result sets and crunching them in your app logic. It's usually best to let the DB do the data crunching and just return out what you need.
      - WorldWideWayne 12y ago
        It was a trivial example. Are you saying that you never write code that needs multiple un-related, un-joinable sets of data out of the database? Even with this example - I need a list of all products and I need a list of all categories... Joining them means I have to write client code to split them up again for display. In any case, I use this tactic a lot for CRUD apps and it makes everything quicker when I can call one stored procedure and get back 7 lists of stuff that I need to display on my page.