Transforming Sql server data base to Mysql one ..

[almasry]

Hello There ,

I have an sql server Database Backup , I got it from My client who wants to rebuild his site with php-mysql .

What i want to do is to transform the sql server backup to MYsql one without losing any data ..

I want to do this without Loading the sql server on my PC ...

i tried many tools but it requires a pre-installed version of sql server to connect to ..

I have the sql server bckup file with the name website.bak

How can i do that ?

[russell]

you'll need to restore the backup file to sql server, then export to mysql. all pretty easy. why for goodness sakes would anyone want to "downgrade" from sql server to mysql?

[almasry]

if u call it ' downgrade ' ,i can tell u , it's something like descending from a bumpy huge mountain to a flat green road :D

it's something related to a global policy in the direction of ' Open source ' ..

May be my talks is not clear , but days will say its word , Do not be hasty , one day i may see u 'downgrading' from is to OS :p

[russell]

nothing at all wrong with open source. but "something like descending from a bumpy huge mountain to a flat green road" is just a bit silly.

MySQL and MS SQL Server are not in the same class, not even close.

i have worked a lot of years with both open source and proprietary platforms and tools. i didn't say anything about OS comparisons, and u wont likely hear me argue that one OS is "better" than another, but truly, MySQL is not in the same league with MSSQL (unless u are talking about the free express version).

this may sound opinionated, but it has nothing to do with opinion. it is fact. now if you (or your client) prefers 100% open source, fine. but i would think long and hard before retiring sql server in favor of a less stable and less powerful database system.

[russell]

Couple of other thoughts worth considering:

I know that many web developers dislike Microsoft. This comes from a dislike of Internet Explorer, which is a point I won't argue here. That should not reflect on their other products, which are top of the line: the office suite and SQL Server. There are exactly 3 enterprise class database products out there: IBM's DB2, Oracle, and MS SQL Server.

Nothing else available comes close to those 3 products, and if a client already has one, a responsible consultant or developer would attempt to convince them to keep it.

One sure way to tell that your developers need to be replaced is when they tell you an entire re-write of your system is in order. This is true at least 99.9% of the time. I once worked with a company that does online advertising -- you've seen it, the double green underlines under key words in articles that pop up inline ads. These guys decided to switch from Microsoft systems to Open Source. Why? Their performance was unacceptable. But guess what? All of their performance issues were due to improper configuration and not with the code or the platforms. It was a joke. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars rewriting their entire system because their CIO didn't understand how to configure servers, nor have the confidence to hire someone who did.

And guess what happens when someone rewrites stable software? They introduce new bugs into the system. This is inevitable. So you take mature code that has had many bug-fixes implemented, then rewrite it and introduce a whole host of new bugs.

None of this is said to detract from the advantages of open source. I have no issues with open source (though I do admit a preference for proprietary). But deciding to do an entire re-write is almost always the wrong choice. And there simply is not an open source database product that comes close to the big three proprietary DBMS. At least not yet.

If you are determined to do the rewrite, you should also get a look at PostgresSQL rather than assume out of hand that MySQL is the way to go. An even look at all of your options may lead you to other conclusions than a rewrite just so u can go with a LAMP implementation.

I can tell you seem offended by my saying "downgrade", but this was not intended to offend. MSSQL works fine with PHP and can do hundreds of things that MySQL cannot do, and is far more secure and stable. I only suggest an unbiased examination of all the options, then a decision based on cost and pros/cons of software choices. If MSSQL is already licensed, I will be willing to bet that there is no cost advantage to migrating away from it.

[almasry]

this issue is not related to Licensing or pricing .It's just the mean of 'LAMP' , stable system with stable secured server with stable database and smart programing language .

Those tools that work in homogeneity , don't allow u to think about other solution ..

I hate running php on IIS and i will not do again , so i don't think i will be able to use Microsoft's DB.

I worked on Mysql for nearly 4 years and i didn't face any problem with stability along the 4 years .. it works perfectly without any problem .

I have no problems with linking tables , php solves the problem .

It's developing quickly , like any open source ..

another thing , if ur soft. is built with mysql , u will have no problems moving to another system or another programing language or reconstructing ur application , u will lose no data and no time .. if u want , u will not need to migrate or to transform like in my case ..

if u ignored the free/open source advantages , the previous reasons are sufficient to make people downgrading from .. to Mysql ..

[russell]

i wouldn't run php on iis either. i run it on rh linux. and i run it with an mssql backend. true, if u want only linux servers then u shouldnt consider mssql. but if u already have mssql running on a win-os, then there is little advantage to switching.

another thing , if ur soft. is built with mysql , u will have no problems moving to another system or another programing language or reconstructing ur application , u will lose no data and no time .. if u want , u will not need to migrate or to transform like in my case .. this is all true of any system. MySQL does not port any easier than oracle or mssql to another paltform. that is all fantasy. there is no such thing as "write once, run anywhere" didn't java teach us all that?

anyway, the only reason u need to migrate is that u choose to do so.

now if u are running php on iis, then yeah, something should change.

my only point is that if your client already has mssql, then what u propose is to give them a less robust and less stable dbms. MySQL is a fine choice, but i wouldn't switch from mssql to it.

as to your original question, php can't read the backup file of an mssql db, so if u dont have access to the original, you'll need to restore the bak file, then u can use whatever u choose to etl to mysql.