Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
AskSQLTeam
Ask SQLTeam Question
0 Posts |
 Posted - 2003-08-22 : 07:42:41
|
| skippy writes "Dear SQLTeam,I was hoping that you very helpful site could include a template or something to that effect that states either officially or not which patches are the latest and which of those are problematic.With the recent Blaster worm, I'm sure a lot of new DBA's would automatically rush to patch (or not at all) and not check user-groups first. I think having a stantard configuration portal would be helpful. Your site has been very helpful on many occasion and I don't see why you couldn't leverage this.Thanks for considering this.MeP.S. Yes, I did just download the latest MDAC patch (Aug 20, 2003), but not yet applied it to the servers.. just for that reason." |
|
|
robvolk
Most Valuable Yak
15732 Posts |
Posted - 2003-08-22 : 07:50:02
|
quote:
I was hoping that you very helpful site could include a template or something to that effect that states either officially or not which patches are the latest
Microsoft already does this, and anything we provide would have to be sourced from them. I don't see much point in duplicating what they have.quote:
and which of those are problematic
The only service pack or patch I've heard that was troublesome was SQL Server 2000 SP3, which has since been superseded by 3a. It's far more difficult to qualify "problematic" because not all people are negatively affected, and it would be misleading to label an SP that way as it could contain a needed fix for someone. In any case, there was a great deal of discussion of problems with SP3 here in the SQL Team forums, it's probably the best place to find info on it.quote:
With the recent Blaster worm, I'm sure a lot of new DBA's would automatically rush to patch (or not at all) and not check user-groups first.
Ummmm, it was a virus that had nothing to do with SQL Server, it didn't exploit any SQL Server weaknesses. In many cases (my company included) "checking user groups first" would only have delayed getting the fix out and increased the infection rate.quote:
I think having a stantard configuration portal would be helpful. Your site has been very helpful on many occasion and I don't see why you couldn't leverage this.
We welcome anyone to join SQL Team and contribute their findings on these matters. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patching SQL Server 2K