More info on the May 2009 update to SQL Server 2008 Books Online
I finally got around to installing this update today, and thought I would mention a few things.
- Don't be surprised that "Books Online (May 2009)" actually says "April 2009" in the application's title bar and on any page which states the version. (I already received one private message asking me why they got the April version instead of the May version.) This has happened for every Books Online update that I can remember — it just takes time to publish and distribute; I don't know what else to tell you.
- To make item 1. even more confusing, the "New and Updated Topics" topic is actually dated "March 30, 2009." Again, please don't nit-pick. While I am quite happy to use the easier-to-update web interface for most things, I am also happy that they are dedicated to pushing these releases out to us, even if it does take 45 days to actually go from "done" to "installed." (Now where is the mobile version for my iPhone?)
- There is a new example in the topic "CREATE USER" that shows how to create and use a user without a login. I had no idea you could create a user without a login behind it. If it weren't for this update (and the fact that they have committed to documenting changes in a sensible way – just check the "Change History" section at the bottom of any page), I would never have been looking at this topic.
- The sp_configure option 'user instance timeout' has been added to the list of deprecated instance options. Initially I thought this had to do with SQL Server Express Edition's user instances option, but apparently this specifically involves just the Compact Edition.
What delay? By the time, many people get to download the May Updates, it may be June already. Are you saying that they should be expecting a June Updates instead. There is always delay. Consistency, and therefore not confusing people, should be the main concerned. As long s it's XX Updates the same everywhere, we are fine and know what to download or verify.
Kevin, this will just confuse / upset a different set of people. They will just be asking a slightly different question about the delay.
I'm not picking sides, just showing that there are multiple arguments.
I think we can all agree that what they should ideally do is draw a line in the sand on the 1st of the month, and commit to completing the publication process before the 1st of the next month. Then the content, title bar, and download page can all truthfully say the same thing. It is a completely different discussion to ponder how feasible that timeline really is.
> it just takes time to publish and distribute; I don't know what else to tell you.
How about just say April Update if that's when the updates were done? Then, they can take however long to publish. Even if it comes out in Aug, it'll still be valid and consistent.