Aaron Bertrand

I am a passionate technologist with industry experience dating back to Classic ASP and SQL Server 6.5. I am a long-time Microsoft MVP, speak frequently at conferences, and write at SQLPerformance and MSSQLTips. I recently joined the team at Wayfair and hope to blog about some of the scale challenges I've already started helping to solve.

5 Responses

  1. Chris Wood says:

    The SP2 KB also has a misleading link that does not match the description in the CU16 KB article. Just follow the 975860 link from the CU16 KB.
    Chris

  2. Chris Wood says:

    Aaron,
    Things look better now with the KB http://support.microsoft.com/kb/974647/en-us it's version 1.1 (still no history entry to say what was changed) and the fixes are
    For more information about the SQL Server bugs, click the following article numbers to view the articles in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: Collapse this tableExpand this tableVSTS bug number KB article number Description
    336733 974067  (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/974067/ )  FIX: You use the COUNT function on a column that is returned by a subquery that returns no rows in SQL Server 2005, and an incorrect result is returned
    351363 975860  (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/975860/ )  FIX: A full backup with snapshot may cause SQL Server 2005 to stop responding
    342368 974398  (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/974398/ )  FIX: The removal of a transaction log file from the database on the principal server causes a database mirroring session to be suspended in SQL Server 2005 or in SQL Server 2008
    310353 970896  (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/970896/ )  MS09-062: Description of the security update for SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 QFE: October 13, 2009
    Chris

  3. AaronBertrand says:

    Thanks Chris, I am waiting on a response from CSS to help clarify the issue.  Basically, now it looks like the SP2 CU has the security patch, but the SP3 CU doesn't.  Hopefully this is just a KB issue.

  4. Chris Wood says:

    Aaron,
    revision 2 now there http://support.microsoft.com/kb/974648
    Chris

  5. AaronBertrand says:

    Yeah they look much better now.  Alex at CSS contacted me directly to ensure all of my questions were answered (basically it was just a KB omission that has been fixed).