Talk:SQL Server Express

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Databases (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Databases, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.DatabasesWikipedia:WikiProject DatabasesTemplate:WikiProject DatabasesDatabases articles

MSDE should be merged into the SQL Server Express article as they're two different versions of the same product. -- Mikeblas 06:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SQL Server Express is not a new version of MSDE, nor is MSDE an older version of SQL Server Express. There are major differences between the two products. Robertwharvey 23:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the sense that SQL Server Express is a lightweight SQL Server intended for embedded applications and small workgroups, SSE is indeed a new version of MSDE. I assume you know of significant internal differences between the two. Can you tell us what they are? Why do you believe they are significant when the intended use for the two products is similar, and MSDE no longer exists? Paul Foxworthy 00:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft's article Upgrading MSDE 2000 to SQL Server 2005 Express states MSDE was based on SQL Server 2000, and SQL Server Express is based on SQL Server 2005. If Robertwharvey can't produce any evidence of how major the differences are, I propose the merger goes ahead. Paul Foxworthy 00:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not merge

In fact, I would propose not to merge as the article (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/msde2sqlexpress.mspx) itself presents gargantuan evidence that there are a very large number of changes between the core workings (chief among which are ones like MDAC is not required for SQL Server Express and integration of the .NET CLR). Besides, product names/brandings have changed and the time between these two product releases is also quite long. I've noticed Microsoft uses the wording "MSDE is REPLACED by SQL Server Express" which again points out that the products are significantly different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xpclient (talk • contribs) 13:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it points out any difference at all in the products; it just shows that Microsoft has changed their branding. MSDE was based on the SQL Server 2000 engine;[1] SQL Server Express is based on the SQL Server 2005 engine.[2][3] As such, I think the requirement for a merge of the two topics is indisputable. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the relevant piece of policy that makes this a requirement for a merge? Also, do you have sources actually stating that the two are considered the same product by anyone? If not, I oppose the merger. --LjL (talk) 15:36, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given the lack of enthusiasm for a merge when this was discussed a couple of years ago, I have removed the proposed merge tags. --Stormie (talk) 04:53, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ram limitations[edit]

Does anyone know what happens when Express hits the 1G memory cap? Does it just stop working or does it start paging? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.152.169.53 (talk) 19:37, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Variants' section is out of date (April 2012)[edit]

It refers to v9 files, which is SQL Server 2005. Since then we have had SQL Server 2008 (v10.0), SQL Server 2008 R2 (v10.05), and from March 2012 we are on SQL Server 2012 (v11.0).

No 32 bit support anymore[edit]

SQL Server 2016 is not available for 23 bit anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.230.2.8 (talk) 06:51, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jinlye (talk) 14:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]