Is Sql Server 2022 Backwards Compatible

[Auriville Cha]

Ihave the option of install SQL Server through my MSDN account - I've programmed for embedded applications but am relatively new to SQL Server and RDBMS in general - most of the people I will be working with use 2012 however.

All versions are generally backward compatible (a new server can run an older database). The problem comes into play when you are backing up a newer version database and trying to restore it to an older version server.

Like Bill said, you can backup a SQL 2012 database and restore it to a newer version of SQL, but not the other way around. In a nutshell, you can upgrade a database to a newer version, but you can't downgrade it.

If you want to write at home and then update your system at work, you don't necessarily have to use the backup and restore approach. You can always create a release script for everything you do. It's really nothing more than a .sql file that contains all the DDL and DML you run in the correct order. It's a great approach if you type, but if you use the GUI, your options are more limited. I type everything, so using a release script is my preferred method.

SQL 2016 has a bunch of new features, but isn't finalized yet. The MSDN page on what's new in 2016 is at -us/library/bb500435.aspx. We have no way of knowing if it would be worth it, but understand that you won't be able to use QL 2016-specific functionality in SQL 2012.

It's been my experience that the newest version isn't always stable, so I don't use the latest and greatest. Then again, I value stability above all else where production data is concerned. If it were me, I'd install SQL 2012 SP1 CU8 or SQL 2014 SP1 at home. You'll also want to pay attention to what edition you have at work and stick with that edition at home.

Part of what I will be doing is automating the upload of data to a set of external sites via XML. In a nutshell, what I need to figure out is how to export data from a 2012 database to a pre-defined XML format (.xsd schema definition supplied by the respective external site).

For example we have many databases running on SQL 2008 R2 that had to be restored with Compatability Level set to SQL 2005 or the breaking changes to the existing dataset types would cause them not to work.

This kinda works... but I have to add a lot of objects manually. The database has tables/views/tvps/sps/scalar functions. Is there a way to script a create statement that is backwards compatible with older SQL Server versions?

I would advocate that you use Visual Studio to create a database project for this. You can set the target to be SQL 2012, then do a build and address any issues found. You can then deploy the schema to SQL 2012, and export/import your data. HTH.

Go through the Tasks > Generate scripts wizard again, there are steps in there where you can choose the all object types, and other places where you can choose what properties of those objects to include (permissions, indexes, etc).

Do not use backup/restore for this. Using scripts is the right way to go. To help you in that there are tools. I can recommend Red Gate Tools (you can create setup project, migration scripts, data insert scripts).

Btw, if you need your database to work on older versions, then develop on older versions (or set compatibility level). Or you will be tempted to use features not available in older versions. If you use older version database then you could restore to newer version. But that path leads to dark side.

I have read that when you create a backup from SQL Server 2012 there is no way to restore it onto a 2008 instance. I assumed that the compatibility level would take care of this problem, but it doesn't. Therefore, I am at a loss as to how to upgrade. Other than upgrade all my clients all at once, which is impossible, I can think of no clean way to do this.

There's two things involved here: the version number of the file, and the compatibility level. When you attach a database to a newer major version (like from 2008 to 2008R2, or 2008R2 to 2012) the database version is changed permanently, and you can't attach that database to an older version again.

The compatibility level setting is used by SQL Server to determine how certain new features should be handled. This way a DB could be migrated to a newer version of SQL without having issues with the application. The compatibility level can be changed back and forth.

Then I came across a wonderful tool for migrating SQL Server to SQL Azure databases. This works for SQL Server to SQL Server as well, for example if you'd like to migrate a SQL 2012 database to 2008 R2. It uses bcp.exe, which uses bulk copy. There is a GUI and command-line (Batch) version available and it's open source. See In my case, the operation took 16 minutes.

I first generate the schema by right-clicking on the database in SQL Server Management Studio, Tasks, Generate scripts. Tick all objects, in advanced objects ensure everything you need is going to be scripted (stats, indexes, etc), untick "USE database" if your destination database has a different name, set the compatibility to your destination database version, and generate a file that creates your schema. Create a database on your destination and run this file on it (using osql, sqlcmd or the GUI).

To move the data, run the following query twice on the source database, first commenting the second column to generate the batch file to extract data, then commenting the first column to generate the import batch file to run on your destination. (You need to add your source and destination servers, instance names, output and input file directories, usernames and passwords. To use integrated security replace the -U and -P options with just -T.)

I have found this vastly superior to generating scripts, and any of the tools I've tried. It also runs on RDS databases (which don't permit backups). The data files generated are 30% the size of the SQL scripts, running them takes a fraction of the time, and is much more reliable. (The scripts generated by SQL Server for scripting data always tripped up, sometimes predictably sometimes not, the SQL generated was not compatible with 2008R2 (eg, used nvarchar(0), often didn't complete for no discernible reason, etc. BCP also replicates any constraint violations, such as referential integrity.).

If I have a mix of different builds of Windows 10 in my environment, can installing the latest group policy administrative templates introduce group policy incompatibilities or are they always backwards compatible? For example Windows Update settings has changed significantly since the first Windows 10 build. If I install the administrative templates for the current Windows 10 build will I still be able to fully manage Windows Update on machines with older Windows 10 builds?

Ok so what if there is a Windows Update setting that existed in an older build of Windows 10 but no longer exists in build 1703? If I install the build 1703 admx files will I lose the ability to manage all older builds in my environment?

If there are polices that are part of this core set (not added in legacy adm templates), all of the polices will be there. They will have a note by their description that says Windows XP through Windows 8.1 (keyword - THROUGH - these would not affect anything Windows 10) or Server 2012, Windows 8 (not anything else other than these 2), or At least Server 2012 (anything higher than Server 2012 including Windows 10, all the way to current 1703).

suppose your server provides an API that consists of services A, B & C. These services are implemented in the business logic layer. access to these services from the clients is always through the facade, no direct access. so your facade (version 1) exposes A, B & C. no big deal so far...

now suppose you need to add service D, remove service B, and change service C. you create a new facade (version 2), which exposes services A, D and an updated C. in your business layer you would add the logic for service D, mark B as "obsolete", and as for the change in C, it depends if the change is backward compatible. if yes it's easy, just add an overload. if service C now works completely different, implement it as a new service. sometimes though there are changes that break old clients...

the Facade itself could be a web service (my preferred solution in most cases), and has no business logic of it's own, its only responsibility is to delegate the call from the client to the approproate service.

and so on. I see the interesting design points coming from how you implement the old interface with the new implementation. For example suppose in the old interface you have a method creating some business item

So when a v1 request arrives at the facade it won't have data for "justification", so what should the facade do? Possibly add in some "UNKNOWN" value, but what you do is not so much a matter of design as a matter of understanding the business requirements. Clearly there are much tricker problems of this kind depending upon the different kinds of change made in creating the new version of the services.

So, first work through interface by interface understanding the requirements, the policies for dealing with the different chnages. This will lead to various implementation problems and when you get to those you may start to see patterns in the implementation that drive you to adopt explicit Design Patterns.

Is one of the scenarios called "backwards-compatibility" and the other "forward-compatibility" in an arbitrary way?Otherwise, if both can be called both ways depending on the reference, then, is client in Scenario A backwards-compatible and server forward-compatible or the other way around?

When something can still connect to a previous version (I assume client - server in A) it is "backwards-compatible" with that previous version. "Forwards compatibility" is not often used in English, but it means the opposite.

3a8082e126