ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles
-
Thanks @scottalanmiller and @bbigford. Not sure if they are willing to spend $$$ to do it right, though. OMG this SMB is so cheap, they're running this SQL DB on a 5 y.o. Dell tower server with no RAID and a consumer-grade HDD! They do have an internal IT guy but he has no business IT concepts whatsoever, he's more like an IT hobbyist with web design background.
I keep telling them they're wasting productivity with their disastrous IT. However, the main problem with many small organisations here is they don't see IT as an investment more like an inevitable expense. I believe that now a successful organisation regardless of its size is always built around a reliable and efficient IT infrastructure that serves them as operational backbone.
-
@taurex said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
Thanks @scottalanmiller and @bbigford. Not sure if they are willing to spend $$$ to do it right, though. OMG this SMB is so cheap, they're running this SQL DB on a ....
Depends how you look at it. You see them as being cheap. I see them as burning money because it's a big joke to show how much they can throw away. SQL Server is only chosen by the ultra rich with money to flaunt. Companies lacking money do IT well and run lean, companies that laugh in the face of profits because they have so much money that it's all just silly to them select outrageously overpriced products for no reason and run them on old worthless hardware... just because it's funny.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
Depends how you look at it. You see them as being cheap. I see them as burning money because it's a big joke to show how much they can throw away. SQL Server is only chosen by the ultra rich with money to flaunt. Companies lacking money do IT well and run lean, companies that laugh in the face of profits because they have so much money that it's all just silly to them select outrageously overpriced products for no reason and run them on old worthless hardware... just because it's funny.
Their DB is relatively small (6 GB) and they're using free SQL Server Express with it, though. The whole thing should've really been open source and web-based, I agree.
-
@taurex said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
Depends how you look at it. You see them as being cheap. I see them as burning money because it's a big joke to show how much they can throw away. SQL Server is only chosen by the ultra rich with money to flaunt. Companies lacking money do IT well and run lean, companies that laugh in the face of profits because they have so much money that it's all just silly to them select outrageously overpriced products for no reason and run them on old worthless hardware... just because it's funny.
Their DB is relatively small (6 GB) and they're using free SQL Server Express with it, though. The whole thing should've really been open source and web-based, I agree.
Even the free version... it requires the expensive Windows license, it takes extra effort to maintain, and it risks outgrowing the free version to become super expensive.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@taurex said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
Depends how you look at it. You see them as being cheap. I see them as burning money because it's a big joke to show how much they can throw away. SQL Server is only chosen by the ultra rich with money to flaunt. Companies lacking money do IT well and run lean, companies that laugh in the face of profits because they have so much money that it's all just silly to them select outrageously overpriced products for no reason and run them on old worthless hardware... just because it's funny.
Their DB is relatively small (6 GB) and they're using free SQL Server Express with it, though. The whole thing should've really been open source and web-based, I agree.
Even the free version... it requires the expensive Windows license, it takes extra effort to maintain, and it risks outgrowing the free version to become super expensive.
SQL Server Express is available on Linux so that clears up the Windows license.
-
@black3dynamite said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@taurex said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
Depends how you look at it. You see them as being cheap. I see them as burning money because it's a big joke to show how much they can throw away. SQL Server is only chosen by the ultra rich with money to flaunt. Companies lacking money do IT well and run lean, companies that laugh in the face of profits because they have so much money that it's all just silly to them select outrageously overpriced products for no reason and run them on old worthless hardware... just because it's funny.
Their DB is relatively small (6 GB) and they're using free SQL Server Express with it, though. The whole thing should've really been open source and web-based, I agree.
Even the free version... it requires the expensive Windows license, it takes extra effort to maintain, and it risks outgrowing the free version to become super expensive.
SQL Server Express is available on Linux so that clears up the Windows license.
NOW it is, but it wasn't when the choices were made, and not the version that they are stuck on. So maybe going forward that is true, but retains the growth risk.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@taurex said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
Thanks @scottalanmiller and @bbigford. Not sure if they are willing to spend $$$ to do it right, though. OMG this SMB is so cheap, they're running this SQL DB on a ....
Depends how you look at it. You see them as being cheap. I see them as burning money because it's a big joke to show how much they can throw away. SQL Server is only chosen by the ultra rich with money to flaunt. Companies lacking money do IT well and run lean, companies that laugh in the face of profits because they have so much money that it's all just silly to them select outrageously overpriced products for no reason and run them on old worthless hardware... just because it's funny.
I disagree with company lacking money doing IT well and running lean, man have I seen many companies with lack of money and IT is well an afterthought or not even run well at all.
-
@dbeato said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@taurex said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
Thanks @scottalanmiller and @bbigford. Not sure if they are willing to spend $$$ to do it right, though. OMG this SMB is so cheap, they're running this SQL DB on a ....
Depends how you look at it. You see them as being cheap. I see them as burning money because it's a big joke to show how much they can throw away. SQL Server is only chosen by the ultra rich with money to flaunt. Companies lacking money do IT well and run lean, companies that laugh in the face of profits because they have so much money that it's all just silly to them select outrageously overpriced products for no reason and run them on old worthless hardware... just because it's funny.
I disagree with company lacking money doing IT well and running lean, man have I seen many companies with lack of money and IT is well an afterthought or not even run well at all.
Even if it is an afterthought...
- Keeping IT till it is an afterthought is a form of wasting money. It means that at the time they were willing to throw money away for non-business reasons just because they preferred whatever else to having more money (e.g. rich enough that they no longer cared about profits)
- Even when it is an afterthought, IT doesn't have to be intentionally wasteful. But when it is, it's because there is more money than people care about.
I think it's a different in how we perceive being "out of money."
You guys mostly use an absolute measure of "they don't seem to have loads of cash by my personal standards."
I use a relational measure of "they have so much money by their own standards that they don't care about throwing it away."
-
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@dbeato said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@scottalanmiller said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
@taurex said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
Thanks @scottalanmiller and @bbigford. Not sure if they are willing to spend $$$ to do it right, though. OMG this SMB is so cheap, they're running this SQL DB on a ....
Depends how you look at it. You see them as being cheap. I see them as burning money because it's a big joke to show how much they can throw away. SQL Server is only chosen by the ultra rich with money to flaunt. Companies lacking money do IT well and run lean, companies that laugh in the face of profits because they have so much money that it's all just silly to them select outrageously overpriced products for no reason and run them on old worthless hardware... just because it's funny.
I disagree with company lacking money doing IT well and running lean, man have I seen many companies with lack of money and IT is well an afterthought or not even run well at all.
Even if it is an afterthought...
- Keeping IT till it is an afterthought is a form of wasting money. It means that at the time they were willing to throw money away for non-business reasons just because they preferred whatever else to having more money (e.g. rich enough that they no longer cared about profits)
- Even when it is an afterthought, IT doesn't have to be intentionally wasteful. But when it is, it's because there is more money than people care about.
I think it's a different in how we perceive being "out of money."
You guys mostly use an absolute measure of "they don't seem to have loads of cash by my personal standards."
I use a relational measure of "they have so much money by their own standards that they don't care about throwing it away."
Who is "you guys"? because now there is a faction of some sort?
When I say there is no money, I meant it in an absolute sense of them having to cut employees or departments where they invest their money because they cannot afford it.
-
@dbeato said in ZeroTier Virtual Adapter and SQL Express 2012 DB Troubles:
When I say there is no money, I meant it in an absolute sense of them having to cut employees or departments where they invest their money because they cannot afford it.
Cutting people while still throwing money away isn't the same as being out of money absolutely, it's just choosing expensive software over people, though.
-
Now it may be that they had money to flaunt that they could burn in the past, burnt it all, and are now living with the consequences of throwing that money away. But that's a little different. They still felt that throwing money away was worth it at the time. Today, sure, maybe they've run out of money, or many they just say that to justify decisions, but at the last time that they were making IT spending decisions....
