Comments
Sort by recent activity
This issue was resolved by installing SQL Data Compare 7.2 patch.
If you are experiencing the problem described in this thread, please contact support@red-gate.com. / comments
This issue was resolved by installing SQL Data Compare 7.2 patch.
If you are experiencing the problem described in this thread, please contact support@red-gate.com.
Thanks for your post.
This currently isn't possible with SQL Compare 8 (as you know), but I agree that it would be a useful feature to have.
I have therefore logged a feature request for it. Hopefully it will be considered for a future version.
The feature tracking code for this is SC-2470.
Thanks for the suggestion. / comments
Thanks for your post.
This currently isn't possible with SQL Compare 8 (as you know), but I agree that it would be a useful feature to have.
I have therefore logged a feature request for it. Hopefu...
Thanks for your post.
I'm glad you managed to figure out the 'error in db reader' was permission related. We understand that in this situation the error returned isn't particularly helpful in troubleshooting the problem, so we will be returning a better error message in future. Hopefully in SQL Data Compare 8.0 (I haven't checked).
SQL Data compare needs the same minimum permissions as SQL Compare needs to interrogate the schema. You can find out those details here:
With regards to the comparison keys, SQL Data Compare can only automatically set them if the table has a Primary key, unique index or unique constraint. Otherwise it doesn't know what to use as the comparison key. We don't think it would be right to guess at the next best key as this could probably cause some strange results. We prefer to leave these objects 'not set' and then the user can decide on the best key to match on.
I hope this helps. / comments
Thanks for your post.
I'm glad you managed to figure out the 'error in db reader' was permission related. We understand that in this situation the error returned isn't particularly helpful in troub...
We can work on this through a private support ticket if you like, we already have one open for you.
If you email support@red-gate.com and include the reference F0022861 in the subject line, it will update the correct ticket.
If the scripts are too big for email, I can set up an ftp area for you. / comments
We can work on this through a private support ticket if you like, we already have one open for you.
If you email support@red-gate.com and include the reference F0022861 in the subject line, it will...
Thanks for your post.
I think I've seen something similar to this in the past.
Does the script parse if you open the script in SSMS, or does it fail at the same place?
Could you also try opening the sql file in notepad, and then save it again with a different name. Does that file parse in SSMS? / comments
Thanks for your post.
I think I've seen something similar to this in the past.
Does the script parse if you open the script in SSMS, or does it fail at the same place?
Could you also try opening th...
Thanks for your reply.
Can you use SQL Compare to check that the structures of the table are identical. It looks like one might have ntext and the other text.
You might find you need to synchronize the structures of the databases before you try and synchronize the data. / comments
Thanks for your reply.
Can you use SQL Compare to check that the structures of the table are identical. It looks like one might have ntext and the other text.
You might find you need to synchronize...
Thanks for your post.
I haven't encountered this kind of limitation before.
Does this mean that the large sp's still state that they're different after synchronization?
I tested this by inserting massive comment blocks into one of my sp's. The behaviour in SQL Compare remained the same when (using your query) the definition > 40000.
What differences are being reported when the sp's get over 32K? / comments
Thanks for your post.
I haven't encountered this kind of limitation before.
Does this mean that the large sp's still state that they're different after synchronization?
I tested this by inserting m...
Thanks for your post.
I suspect that the target database has the compatibility mode set to SQL 2005 or below. If this is the case, then SQL Server will reject the data type.
Let me know if that fixes the problem or not. / comments
Thanks for your post.
I suspect that the target database has the compatibility mode set to SQL 2005 or below. If this is the case, then SQL Server will reject the data type.
Let me know if that fix...
Thanks for your post.
This error is returned by SQL Server, which I think will mean that for it to work with SQL Data Compare, you either have to turn off replication on that column, or exclude that column from the sync.
However, UPDATETEXT is going to be removed from SQL Server in future versions, so maybe the sync will work if you use the recommended UPDATE .WRITE command instead of UPDATETEXT.
Can you try replacing the UPDATETEXT command in the generated SQL script to use:
.WRITE ( expression, @Offset , @Length ) http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms177523.aspx
If that works, then I will make sure the developers know about this and can incorporate it into a future version.
Let me know what you think. / comments
Thanks for your post.
This error is returned by SQL Server, which I think will mean that for it to work with SQL Data Compare, you either have to turn off replication on that column, or exclude tha...
Thanks for your post.
Unfortunately this isn't possible in the current version. I think the only workaround would be to edit the script and manually remove the commands for windows users.
I've logged a feature request for this, so hopefully it will be considered for a future version. The feature tracking code is SC-4474. / comments
Thanks for your post.
Unfortunately this isn't possible in the current version. I think the only workaround would be to edit the script and manually remove the commands for windows users.
I've logg...