SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 2
Posted by Daniel Fleshbourne on 01 February 2003 - 10:01 · 6 comments & 1113 views
About the Author
Full name: Daniel Fleshbourne
Forum name: Daniel
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Daniel Fleshbourne
Forum name: Daniel
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
#1 Posted by bovril_156 on 01 Feb 2003 - 10:12
- Or you could download the latest service pack, SP3
[url]http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/2000/sp3.asp[/url]
-
#2 Posted by BudMan on 01 Feb 2003 - 13:35
- Second that - SP3
-
#3 Posted by WiNuX on 01 Feb 2003 - 13:39
- Yeah... how come the download link is dated 31/1/2003 since SP3 is available since last week or so...
-
(1 reply)
#4 Posted by Vasquez on 01 Feb 2003 - 13:43
- Looks like splitting Service Packs into three or so seperate modules is the way MS are going... wish they'd bring back one nice single install, who cares if it means you download another 50mb, that's nothing nowadays.
-
#4.1 Posted by JaggedFlame on 01 Feb 2003 - 17:18
- Why? I don't want to carry around 150 MB on my backup disk every time I reinstall Windows and want to update MSDE.
-
#5 Posted by kirk26 on 01 Feb 2003 - 13:45
- This needs to go into Neowin's funniest moments.
Download Size: 39335 KB - 479611 KB - Date Published: 1/31/2003 - Version: 8.00.0534.01
Overview
SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 2 (SP2) is divided into three parts to reduce the size of downloads: database components, Analysis Services components, and SQL Server 2000 Desktop Engine (MSDE).
Note: Microsoft recommends that customers install the most recent cumulative security patch for Microsoft SQL Server 2000 (which will also patch MSDE 2000), which corrects vulnerabilities including the Slammer (W32.slammer) virus. See Microsoft Security Bulletin MS02-061 for more information.
System Requirements
Windows 2000, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows NT, Windows XP
SQL Server 2000
Another analyst firm came up with similar estimates that measured the cost of cleanup rather than of lost productivity. Technology market researcher Computer Economics estimates that the worm cost between $750 million and $1 billion to clean up, said Mark McManus, vice president of technology and research for the Carlsbad, Calif., firm.
"The labor costs, although significant, weren't as bad as Code Red," McManus said. Analysts at Computer Economics had estimated that the LoveLetter virus cost almost a billion dollars in cleanup and more than $7.7 billion in lost productivity.
Many security experts argue, however, that while SQL Slammer is easier to clean up, the worm was worse overall than Code Red--which attacked more servers but didn't affect infrastructure, such as financial systems.
"This worm did something that we have not seen before," said Peter Allor, director of operations for the Information Technology Information Sharing and Analysis Center (IT-ISAC). "In this case, the customer was affected," he said. "People weren't getting dial tones, airplanes couldn't fly, ATMs weren't giving cash."
Data on computer viruses has always been lean. Putting a dollar figure on the losses incurred by malicious code is difficult at best, said Michael Gartenberg, research director for Internet industry watcher Jupiter Research.
"It is a billion soft dollars, and that is an important part of an equation," he said, stressing that the losses weren't actually coming out of companies' wallets. "Measuring productivity and translating it into dollars is a hard thing."
In the past, analysts have tried to bill a variety of events to lost productivity. Last May, outplacement service Challenger Gray and Christmas estimated that the first day of "Star Wars: Episode II--Attack of the Clones" would cost firms $319 million in lost productivity from workers calling in sick and taking days off. In addition, Internet monitoring software maker Websense estimated in May 2000 that a Webcast by underwear retailer Victoria Secret would cost businesses $120 million in lost productivity.
Mi2g's Matai said there is a big difference between those numbers and the losses incurred by malicious code.
"I don't think we are looking at productivity loss like that at all," he said. "We are looking at how many servers went down, what was the utilization of those servers and what kind of traffic didn't get through," he said. "The administrators could do nothing until they sorted all that mess out. So it is a different measure of productivity loss."