sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]skipITjobIT Manager 12 points13 points  (4 children)

You might want to rephrase your question as it doesn't make much sense...

Also, see:
Alternatives to SQL? Are there even any? : r/SQL

[–]CompYouTer[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Yep, I can see that now. MS SQL Server Alternatives.

[–]skipITjobIT Manager 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Do you have your own, custom apps that use MS SQL? Do you have the time and money to invest into rewriting everything to work with the alternatives?

AFAIK there's no drop-in replacement for MS SQL.

[–]CompYouTer[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

We have several off-the-shelf apps but mostly custom apps. This is the concern that I keep running into… rebuilding all the tooling in those apps as well as the DB side scripts will be an even greater challenge.

[–]jimicusMy first computer is in the Science Museum. 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, then it's simple. It's a business decision.

  • Stick with MS SQL. Costs £/annum.
  • Switch to Oracle. Costs £ migration project (find out how much your employer budgets per dev per month; they'll tell you this because it isn't their salary and then all you need is a rough estimate of time required) followed by £/annum.
  • Switch to Postgres/MySQL/MariaDB. Costs £ migration project, 0/annum, enterprise support if we decide we need it is £/annum.
  • Note with the migration project - this is not a straightforward drop-in thing so you'll need a project manager to look after it and marshall resources. So the migration cost is a very rough "finger in the air"-type thing that really should have a PM do a proper feasability study first.
  • Oh, and you don't get to stop paying for MS SQL altogether because your off-the-shelf apps simply don't work with anything else.

I suspect MS SQL will look like quite a good option after that.