It's Not Too Late to Migrate from Microsoft SQL Server 2005

The hourglass runs low for Microsoft (News - Alert) SQL Server 2005: April 12 is around the corner, and extended support officially ends then.

The problems that come from running an outdated server are myriad: loss of access to critical security updates; higher costs to maintain legacy IT products; compliance issues; and inability to upgrade outdated hardware. More seriously, if there is a crisis and infrastructure goes down, there will be no one to call for help.

So with all this in mind, why haven’t some businesses migrated? For many, SQL Server 2005 insures critical applications or data; it’s embedded in day-to-day operations, so businesses continue to use it. In fact, the sum of total of users still running SQL Server 2005 is larger than any previous migration; IDC estimates that about 800,000 servers globally still rely on it.

Leaning so heavily on database infrastructure can actually drive procrastination: According to Vision Solutions’ 2016 State of the Resilience report, the two top reasons for delaying a migration were fear of downtime or lack of resources. Another reason, of course, is cost – but the price paid could be in more than dollars if a business does not carefully consider the platform it uses.

The Price of Migration

Migrations are a necessary expense for IT infrastructure developments, but the monetary cost can create trepidation. A Forrester Research, Microsoft-commissioned study estimated that a retail organization with 30,000 employees and 300 SQL Server databases would pay $1.5 million in initial software licensing fees to move to a newer SQL server, and $600,000 per year subsequently. It also estimated a cost of $1.8 million for “training, data migration, planning” and other professional services.

That study deals solely with native migration, so costs will vary depending on what kind of migration option a business selects. When looking at a solution and its overall cost, IT leaders need to consider the entire context of the migration. This can include licensing costs; upgraded hardware; resource time required; cost of any downtime; and any migration software.

Some free software does not allow zero or near-zero downtime, and so the cost of downtime may trump any savings if a business cannot absorb the cost of downtime. According to a recent study by Ponemon Institute, the average maximum downtime cost rose to $2.4 million in 2015 – an increase of 81 percent since 2010. The factor that created the most cost was business disruption, followed by lost revenue and end-user productivity.

A business also risks its data’s integrity: If the data do not synchronize correctly, the database hasn’t replicated, and even if it replicates core data, ancillary data – like user credentials and passwords – need to move over as well, and behave the same way after migration. If this doesn’t happen, the migration has failed.

Some businesses need to migrate decades of data – multiple terabytes at a time – and are hesitant to even begin for fear that some data won’t migrate properly; others may have attempted a migration that failed, and they are afraid to try again. Still others, such as a new business, may have never migrated data, and fear of the unknown is keeping them from getting started.

The Right Migration Option

There are ways, however, to ensure a successful migration without data loss and downtime. As end of support for SQL Server 2005 looms, keeping in mind the following factors when selecting a migration option can ease fears.

• Infrastructure: Many businesses already have an annual review process in place, but diving into the infrastructure may show a much more complex picture than expected. For example, an application may be using SQL Server 2005 behind the scenes, but have tertiary applications or front-end portals that will also need to be migrated at the same time. Likewise, if a business is running older hardware supported by the SQL Server 2005 environment, then that hardware needs an upgrade.

• Data Loss: For many businesses, data are the heart of their operations, so maintaining data integrity while keeping the lights on 24/7 is the most important consideration when looking at any migration software. Most businesses simply cannot afford a data loss during migration to a new database. It also is essential that data are synchronized as well as transferred, so applications function the way they did prior to the migration.

• Downtime and resilience: According to the Vision Solutions 2016 State of the Resilience report, nearly 70 percent of respondents have not calculated the hourly cost of downtime for their business, and this is a mistake. Knowing what is and is not affordable in terms of downtime is of paramount importance when looking at migration options. If a business is in a complex environment with SQL databases supporting multiple critical applications, they need to keep operations running on a 24/7 basis and cannot afford downtime; this is the case with many businesses that run externally facing applications such as portals or email.

• Testing: The ability to test the upgrade without impacting the production database will simulate the actual migration experience without affecting operations and is invaluable to easing fears about downtime and data loss and any uncertainty about the migration process itself. Completing a dry run to thoroughly test the new version of the database is a must. If a migration solution does not allow the option to see a comparison on a test server, as well as provide minute-to-minute backup, then the test becomes less reassuring because the data are not current.

• Staff: Determine what learning curve is associated with the migration option. Staff may need to learn a new process, which will add to the total migration time, as does incorporating other services to manage the migration. A migration solution that is intuitive and straightforward, with little to no learning curve associated with it, might be a better option for a business that does not have a lot of time built in for migration.

Planning at a granular level can help mitigate many of the risks of a migration, and keeping the above considerations in mind when selecting migration software can help a business make the right move and migrate with confidence.

Suchita Nagale is vice president of IT for Vision Solutions. Nagale can be reached at [email protected].