Más o menos, casi siempre nos hemos interesado por los orígenes de SQL Server… al principio era un producto casi casi calcado a Sybase, pero con el paso del tiempo, desde la versión 7.0, el producto se rehízo completamente…Aquí tienes un post de Euan Garden de hace más de un año (enero de 2006), en el que relata la “evolución histórica” del producto…SQL MythBusters – «SQL Server is really a Sybase product not a Microsoft one.»


Algunos detalles interesantes:

·        Al principio MS no tenía acceso ni siquiera al código… luego tuvieron permiso de lectura, y hasta les dejaron hacer modificaciones J

“Microsoft continued the evolution of SQL Server, adding support for Windows via SQL Server 1.1 in 1990, although almost all the work was still done by Sybase with Microsoft doing testing, project management and some minor development. Over the course of 1991 the Microsoft team was given read and then read/write access to the code to allow bug fixes to be made.”

·        Alguna “movidilla” entre versiones NT y OS/2.

“Things started to heat up just after this release, Microsoft had been working on a 32 bit version of SQL Server and Sybase was working on what would become System 10. At this point OS/2 was becoming less viable as a platform and Microsoft already had beta versions of Windows NT that was 32 bit only, available. So the SQL Server team decided to build on the stable 4.2 code for its port to NT while Sybase continued with the new System 10 code base.”

·        La contratación de grandes gurús de la industria para hacer algo nuevo:

“During this window Microsoft decided to go “big” on the data management front, part of doing that meant building a stronger, bigger team and while the org had grown from the 1 corridor it occupied in the very early days, more needed to be done. Microsoft went out and hired some of the best and most experienced people in the database industry(Hal Berenson, Peter Spiro, David Campbell  and others from DEC, James Hamilton, Lubor Kollar and others from IBM, Bill Baker from Oracle, Pedro Celis, Pat Helland from Tandem) and paired them with the best in research(Jim Gray, Phil Bernstein and others) and some of the smartest new graduates from Database Masters and PhD programs from around the world, combing these folks with the original “soul” of the team(folks like Ron Soukup) and others from inside Microsoft allowed a great, focused team to be built and gel’d in a short space of time. Some of this team worked on 6.0/6.5 but a number of them came on line to work on what was called Sphinx, the code name for the next version of SQL Server, which was shipped as version 7.0.”

·        Según Euan, Sphinx (SQL Server 7.0) fué el punto de partida hacia un producto que se seguia llamando SQL Server, pero poco (o nada) tenía que ver con la alianza original con Sybase:

“The goals for Sphinx were clear, set a new standard in ease of use for complete management of data, to do so meant building a new platform that could be extended in years to come, learning the lessons of the previous releases of SQL Server and other database platforms. To do this required a complete rewrite of the Database Engine, a new Query Processor, a new Storage Engine and a new set of Data Access APIs (OLE DB and ADO, finally putting dblib on hold)”

·        Los orígenes de OLAP:

“While SQL Server had made its name as a relational database management system, with SQL Server 7.0 Microsoft wanted to provide a complete data solution, this meant adding support for OLAP via OLAP Services (the code was based on an acquisition of “Plato” from Panorama in Israel), ETL/Data Integration via DTS (the code was developed in house by the Starfighter/Tools team).”

·        La integración de Service Broker en SQL Server 2005:

“Service Broker (this was another side project that we decided to integrate after Dave Campbell spent time looking into messaging/queuing/SOA with our MSMQ team in Israel),”

·        Desarrollo de SQL Mobile:

“Microsoft does use a variety of resources (SQL Mobile is developed in the Microsoft India facility now, although thats not where it started)”

·        Teoría sobre la integración de FOX en productos MS:

«… Is there any truth to the rumor that MS bought FoxPro and integrated portions of that at about the time of the 6.5/7.0 release. Inquiring minds gotta know. …»

I have no actual connection with Microsoft, but as I recall, Microsoft bought Fox Software in 1992. What you may be thinking of is that the technology of client-side cursors came from FoxPro – I guess that’s more of an ADO thing that a strictly SQL Server thing.”


En definitiva, un post de Euan Garden que alimenta un poco mi “culturilla” sobre ese producto que tanto me apasiona…

Espero que te resulte tan interesante como a mí; disfruta de la lectura… J


Eladio Rincón