Re: Collation advice going from 2000 to 2008

On May 23, 1:43 am, "Geoff Schaller"
<geof...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
James,

What problems are you anticipating? Why not just use the default (which
is almost always superior) and run your applications to see what impact
it might have. We are talking sorting... right? We're here in Australia
which also uses British date formats etc and the default collation has
never given us issues here, in the US or in Europe.

Geoff Schaller
Software Objectives

"JimLad" <jamesdbi...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:8e167c56-b32e-473f-bd32-4f547f83cec1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



Hi ,

We have a SQL Server 2000 instance using
SQL_Latin_1_General_CP1_CI_AS. We will be moving to a new server and
upgrading to 2008 at the same time.

I will set up a new 2008 server with UK regional settings (dd/mm/yyyy
etc). I then intend to install SQL Server 2008 and I will select
SQL_Latin_1_General_CP1_CI_AS during installation.

Presumably this will prevent any collation problems? Are there any
drawbacks to continuing to use SQL_Latin_1_General_CP1_CI_AS? And what
is the alternative if any that will mean the databases continue to
work without any collation issues?

Cheers,

James- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Hi Geoff,

Have you ever tried migrating a db with one collation onto a server
with a different collation. Then try using any code with a temp table
and see how you get on! :-)

This assumes you haven't been specifying collation on all joins etc...

James
.

Loading