What are the downsides of sqlserver 2008 (vs 2005)

Question

I'm starting a new project and I'm considering using sqlserver 2008.

I've had a lot of trouble getting teamsystem to work with it, and I'm wondering if sql server 2008 is widely used in productions environment yet.

What whould you choose? How do you compare sqlserver 2005 and 2008?

EDIT : I agree about the obvious and general tradeoff between new (new features, one painfull migration avoided in the future) and old (less bugs, more documentation). I've already browse the web about differences between 2005 and 2008. My question is more specific : Are YOU using 2008? are YOU experiencing problems (such as the FTS mentionned below?)

Answer 1

This is always a risk in moving to a new version of a program. These are some questions you should be asking yourself:

• Have you already completed a lot of manual testing on the old version?
• Can you cope with a bug in the new version?
• How long has the new version been in use by other people?
• Are you at the start or end of a project cycle?

The big risk in not moving to the new version now is that:

• You will be forced to move later and that may not be such a good time for you. (But you may be able to skip a release so not having to repeat the pain as many times)
• You can’t use what has been added to the new version
• In the long term a lot less people will know how to use the old version
• It is not good for your staff’s CV to be using too many very old versions of different things – hence it may affect your staff turnover etc.

So you need to plot, “pain” and “benefit” against time and then you will clearly see the right time to move; however we can’t see forward in time, and we can’t move back in time!

Answer 2

If you don't need any of the functionality of SQL Server 2008, then I would recommend using SQL Server 2005 SP3. This is a mature, robust and feature-rich database platform. I am currently implementing a strategic database platform for a client right now and have standardised on SQL Server 2005 SP3 64bit clusters. None of my client's applications require any SQL Server 2008 features, and I get the comfort of knowing that SQL Server 2005 has been used in the field for three years now.

Answer 3

Main downside: you will be discovering the new bugs and you will be waiting for the corresponding packs or hotfixes. Please have a look at this page (cumulative update pack 11 for SQL server 2005) or navigate in the Microsoft Knowledge Base, close your eyes and imagine all the pain other users went through when they discovered these buggs ...

EDIT: we do not use SQL 2008. We do not need any of its new functionalities.

Answer 4

Database systems are one of the areas that considering the change is costly. From what I have seen so far, since 2005 works pretty well, large projects are probably still using it (some large projects even still use 2000). However, it doesn't mean 2008 is bad or doesn't worth it. If you are considering a new project, you should probably go with 2008. I don't think there are any big downside to do so.

About TFS, I got to say, team foundation server has one of the worst installation experiences I have ever seen in a Microsoft product. I believe it's an issue with TFS not SQL Server 2008. By the way TFS SP1 is compatible with 2008, but you have to integrate the service pack first.

Answer 5

Maybe you should take a look at Breaking Changes to Database Engine Features in SQL Server 2008 for if you go with 2005 and try and upgrade later.

Personally at this stage I'd go with 2005 and avoid the features outlines in the article. Your customers/application/developers won't lose out on much (if any) functionality.

Answer 6

One downside to 2008: Full-Text search is slower (in some cases, at least). This hit Stack Overflow (the link is to the SO blog). There are good reasons behind the change, but it's worth knowing about before you start.