Comments
Sort by recent activity
Hi Michael,
I think we are best to continue this via a support call. We already have one open, I will e-mail you regarding it.
Pete / comments
Hi Michael,
I think we are best to continue this via a support call. We already have one open, I will e-mail you regarding it.
Pete
Hi there,
Please can you confirm if you have any linked servers at all in this setup? If you can also confirm which version of SQL Compare you are experiencing this in that would be great.
Many thanks!
Pete / comments
Hi there,
Please can you confirm if you have any linked servers at all in this setup? If you can also confirm which version of SQL Compare you are experiencing this in that would be great.
Many tha...
Hi there,
I am afraid that this isn't possible with the tool, however can I suggest that as a workaround you set up all of your mappings and them save these as individual project files? This means that you should be able to come back to them at a later date, and providing there hasn't been any underlying schema changes, your mappings will still be kept in the project file.
Pete / comments
Hi there,
I am afraid that this isn't possible with the tool, however can I suggest that as a workaround you set up all of your mappings and them save these as individual project files? This means ...
Hi Aaron,
I could be reading this wrong, however from your post it suggests that you have a cluster which is active/passive consisting of 2 actual physical machines making up each node.
If this is correct, SQL Backup has always, as far as I am aware, been licensed on a per machine basis, with you needing a license of SQL Backup PRO for each node of the cluster. Ordinarily, the passive node is charged at a reduced rate since it is passive, however the sales team need to be contacted to arrange this.
If you had enough activations / licenses for SQL Backup on this cluster, then I believe activation on the active node *would* have activated both nodes of the cluster. I do however believe that we could have done something more to notify you that the passive node of the cluster wasn't activated, rather than you having to realise this upon failover. I have therefore added this as a feature request in our systems under SB-4450.
Do however let me know if I am misunderstanding your setup Aaron and am completely wrong in what I have said above.
Pete / comments
Hi Aaron,
I could be reading this wrong, however from your post it suggests that you have a cluster which is active/passive consisting of 2 actual physical machines making up each node.
If this is ...
Hi Padwin,
I was thinking command line, but didn't want to influence you towards that [image]
It isn't currently possible, but I have added it as a feature request for you with tracking number SE-643. I am sure it will be reviewed by the product management team for a future release of the tool.
Pete / comments
Hi Padwin,
I was thinking command line, but didn't want to influence you towards that
It isn't currently possible, but I have added it as a feature request for you with tracking number SE-643. I a...
Hi Padwin,
I can certainly add this as a feature request in our systems, however how would you like to see this implemented?
Many thanks!
Pete / comments
Hi Padwin,
I can certainly add this as a feature request in our systems, however how would you like to see this implemented?
Many thanks!
Pete
Hi Marty,
Apologies, you should use the patch described in the below link: http://www.red-gate.com/messageboard/vi ... php?t=9860
If this does not work, please can you send an e-mail to support(at)redgate.com and we will troubleshoot this further.
Many thanks!
Pete / comments
Hi Marty,
Apologies, you should use the patch described in the below link:http://www.red-gate.com/messageboard/vi ... php?t=9860
If this does not work, please can you send an e-mail to support(at)r...
Hi Marty,
Please could you try this with the latest cumulative patch of SQL Data Compare available from below and let me know how you get on? http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/vi ... php?t=9880
Many thanks!
Pete / comments
Hi Marty,
Please could you try this with the latest cumulative patch of SQL Data Compare available from below and let me know how you get on?http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/vi ... php?t=9880
M...
Hi Matt,
Can you please try this again using the syntax that I provided in my last update? For example, in the sample databases with SQL Data Compare there is a table called [dbo].[Contacts]. This would be specified as follows: sqldatacompare /db1:WidgetDev /db2:WidgetLive /s1:"ts-pete\sql2008" /s2:"ts-pete\sql2008" /include:table:"Contacts"
Many thanks! / comments
Hi Matt,
Can you please try this again using the syntax that I provided in my last update? For example, in the sample databases with SQL Data Compare there is a table called [dbo].[Contacts]. This ...
Hi Matt,
Can you try using the following: ^tbl_ppws_run_results$
And if that doesn't work: "^tbl_ppws_run_results$"
I believe that in version 7 the tool compared on the fully qualified object name hence the brackets, however version 8 doesn't behave like that anymore, hence the removal of the brackets.
Please can you let me know how you get on with this Matt?
Pete / comments
Hi Matt,
Can you try using the following:^tbl_ppws_run_results$
And if that doesn't work:"^tbl_ppws_run_results$"
I believe that in version 7 the tool compared on the fully qualified object nam...