Comments
Sort by recent activity
Thanks for your post.
1. Team Foundation Service has been supported since SQL Source Control 3.1. You can find the documentation here.
2. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a good way to do this. See the following thread: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1077 ... svn-to-tfs
I hope this helps. / comments
Thanks for your post.
1. Team Foundation Service has been supported since SQL Source Control 3.1. You can find the documentation here.
2. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a good way to do thi...
That's great. If you're unable to do that, would you be able to send me (through the support ticket we also have open) a SQL Compare snapshot of the source and target schema and I'll try and replicate the issue here? / comments
That's great. If you're unable to do that, would you be able to send me (through the support ticket we also have open) a SQL Compare snapshot of the source and target schema and I'll try and replic...
Thanks for your post.
Digging a little deeper, I think there can be situations where SQL Compare will override the 'transaction isolation level' and default to 'serializable'.
It would be great to try it with your snapshots and see if it's doing by design in this situation, or if it's doing for the wrong reasons (bug).
You can create the snapshots through the SQLCompare UI. File > Save snapshot / comments
Thanks for your post.
Digging a little deeper, I think there can be situations where SQL Compare will override the 'transaction isolation level' and default to 'serializable'.
It would be great to ...
Thanks for your reply.
Could you try uninstalling SQL Compare 10.5 and downgrade to 10.4?
There were a couple of problems with 10.5, so we pulled the release. This might be another example of it's brokenness.
Let me know how you get on. / comments
Thanks for your reply.
Could you try uninstalling SQL Compare 10.5 and downgrade to 10.4?
There were a couple of problems with 10.5, so we pulled the release. This might be another example of it's ...
Thanks for your post.
It seems to respect the setting for me when I generate a script using SQL Compare 10.5.0.611.
The only thing I can think of is that for some reason you're unable to update the registry location where that setting is stored.
Can you check the 'TransactionIsolationLevel' string in:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Red Gate\SQL Compare 10\UI
Can you make sure your account is able to modify this location, and that the string is set to 'READ COMMITTED'? / comments
Thanks for your post.
It seems to respect the setting for me when I generate a script using SQL Compare 10.5.0.611.
The only thing I can think of is that for some reason you're unable to update the...
The bug tracking code for this issue is OC-644. / comments
The bug tracking code for this issue is OC-644.
Hi Brian,
Thanks for the reproduction. This looks like a bug. It seems we're not properly escaping the comments at the object level for Views.
In my previous tests I was only commenting on tables, which seemed to work fine, so thanks for the more detailed steps.
I'll log a bug for this and find out when it might get fixed. / comments
Hi Brian,
Thanks for the reproduction. This looks like a bug. It seems we're not properly escaping the comments at the object level for Views.
In my previous tests I was only commenting on tables, ...
Sorry for the delay. I missed your updates and only just noticed your reply.
I'll look at this now. / comments
Sorry for the delay. I missed your updates and only just noticed your reply.
I'll look at this now.
Thanks for your post.
Do you happen to know what version of Oracle was used when those comments were originally created? I haven't been able to reproduce the problem as Oracle 11g will always reject my comments if the quotes are not properly escaped.
What happens if you use 'Schema Compare for Oracle' and compare the schema to another (blank) schema? Does it have the same problem, or do the comments get properly escaped?
If they get escaped, you might be able to do a deployment to a blank schema, and then back again to fix up any of the problematic comments in the original schema.
If that doesn't help, I can see if there is anything else we can do. Do you know of any way I can reproduce this in house? / comments
Thanks for your post.
Do you happen to know what version of Oracle was used when those comments were originally created? I haven't been able to reproduce the problem as Oracle 11g will always rejec...
I think I follow. If you don't specify NOPARALLEL then the index after the alter keeps the original PARALLEL setting.
I'll test that out and report a bug if that's the case.
Thanks for the clarification. / comments
I think I follow. If you don't specify NOPARALLEL then the index after the alter keeps the original PARALLEL setting.
I'll test that out and report a bug if that's the case.
Thanks for the clarific...