vBulletin Search Engine Optimization
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| Neil (nospam@nospam.net) writes: > Erland mentioned "compatibility level 90" as possibly entailing some > incompatibilities. Would you concur? You can choose compatibiliy level 70. There still are cases of what is is illegal syntax bot not caught by SQL 2000. (Don't know if SQL 7 has the same issues.) But with compatibility level 70, some functionalit will not be available to you. Beside mew reserved keywords, the main issue is the old-style outer join (*= and =*) that are not permitted in level 90. If you have this, rewrite it, because this is crap. Note that you could run into issues if you upgrade to SQL 2000 as well, althogh I think difference between level 70 and 80 is just three keywords. I've seen some mentions that Access 2003 is not co-operative with SQL2005, but you probably get better answer on that in an Access newsgroup. -- Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx |
| |||
| Sounds like a plan. Thanks. "Hugo Kornelis" <hugo@perFact.REMOVETHIS.info> wrote in message news:ct7lt1l2q78ulrbj4jm7p7se9spq00c62u@4ax.com... > On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:27:25 GMT, Neil wrote: > >>> then I'd recommend you to go for SQL 2005. Every upgrade >>> you ever do will require you to deal with SOME incompatibilities. But >>> from SQL 7 to SQL 2005 should be relatively easy. >> >>Erland mentioned "compatibility level 90" as possibly entailing some >>incompatibilities. Would you concur? > > Hi Neil, > > Compatibility level 90 means that you unlock all the new features that > were implemented in SQL Server 2005. Upgrading to SQL Server 2005 > without striving for compatibility level 90 is, IMHO, a bit silly. > > Lower compatibility levels are included to make upgrading easier. At > compatibility level 70, many features still behave the same as in SQL > Server 7.0. Not all, though - some changes to the core of the DB engine > were just too drastic to allow mimicking the "old" behaviour. > > Upgrading from SQL Server 7.0 to SQL Server 2005 at compatibility level > 70 means that you have to make only minimal changes - you don't have to > change the features that are still supported in the compatibility level. > But this should only be a first step - the next step should be to > replace old functionality with new functionality, then set the > compatbility level to 90. And after that, you can begin to unleash the > true power of all the new features! > > -- > Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP |
| ||||
| Thanks, and thanks for the note about Access 2003 and SQL 2005. "Erland Sommarskog" <esquel@sommarskog.se> wrote in message news:Xns9758F0BBCCE23Yazorman@127.0.0.1... > Neil (nospam@nospam.net) writes: >> Erland mentioned "compatibility level 90" as possibly entailing some >> incompatibilities. Would you concur? > > You can choose compatibiliy level 70. There still are cases of what > is is illegal syntax bot not caught by SQL 2000. (Don't know if SQL 7 > has the same issues.) But with compatibility level 70, some functionalit > will not be available to you. > > Beside mew reserved keywords, the main issue is the old-style outer > join (*= and =*) that are not permitted in level 90. If you have this, > rewrite it, because this is crap. > > Note that you could run into issues if you upgrade to SQL 2000 as > well, althogh I think difference between level 70 and 80 is just > three keywords. > > > I've seen some mentions that Access 2003 is not co-operative with SQL2005, > but you probably get better answer on that in an Access newsgroup. > > -- > Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se > > Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx > Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at > http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx |