Comments
Sort by recent activity
Thanks for your post.
It's not possible to exclude specific files when you register the scripts as SQL Compare needs to register the whole schema to asses the dependencies. It will always attempt to register all the .sql files within the script folder.
When you filter objects, you are only really filtering them from the comparison and synchronisation. The excluded objects will still be registered when you run the project.
You could try temporarily changing the file extension if you don't want them to be included, or you could remove them from the folder for the purposes of the comparison. / comments
Thanks for your post.
It's not possible to exclude specific files when you register the scripts as SQL Compare needs to register the whole schema to asses the dependencies. It will always attempt t...
Thanks for your post.
This scenario isn't particularly easy to handle using SQL Compare.
Generally, objects will only have three part name if they are used cross database, so normally this would be a meaningful difference that you would want to synchronize.
There are of course situations where this is not the desired behaviour, but we haven't implemented anything within the tool to help. We have an open feature request (SC-3585) to allow the user to ignore the database name, but this would mean that the database name wouldn't be in the script at all.
I'm assuming that you need the database name; you just need it reassigned to target db name, rather than keeping the source db name.
I think the only workaround would be to output the sync script, and then perform a find and replace.
I'm sorry I can't be of more help. / comments
Thanks for your post.
This scenario isn't particularly easy to handle using SQL Compare.
Generally, objects will only have three part name if they are used cross database, so normally this would be...
It should do. By default, all objects will be unchecked for synchronization. / comments
It should do. By default, all objects will be unchecked for synchronization.
Thanks for your post.
It sounds like a bug, but I haven't been able to reproduce it.
Would you be able to post the table structure for the table that causes this error?
Can you recreate the same problem if you create a new project file? / comments
Thanks for your post.
It sounds like a bug, but I haven't been able to reproduce it.
Would you be able to post the table structure for the table that causes this error?
Can you recreate the same pr...
Thanks for your post.
By default SQL Compare will ignore 'filegroups, partition functions and partition schemes'
You might find you get the results you're expecting if you turn off this option in: Project Configuration > Options > Ignore > 'Filegroups, partition schemes and partition functions'
Hopfully this will help, but let me know if it doesn't. / comments
Thanks for your post.
By default SQL Compare will ignore 'filegroups, partition functions and partition schemes'
You might find you get the results you're expecting if you turn off this option in: ...
Thanks for your suggestions.
1. Search feature with the potential of a wildcard search. Example if we're looking for a certain sproc...type it in the search & it will return a web page with every location this sproc is located in.
I've logged this suggestion for consideration in a future version of SQL Doc (SDOC-1423). However, you might find that using Red Gate SQL Search in SSMS already does a pretty good job of this, and it's free!
2. The ability to edit descriptions for tables, views, etc. with the capability of the updated description to be added back to the database.
This is currently supported in the UI. See here
Or would you like to make actual structural changes to the objects through SQL Doc?
3. A quick refresh for descriptions for example. So if something was recently changed in SSMS you can refresh that particular page to show your update without rerunning then entire SQL Doc for that server when only 1 small change was made.
I'm not sure this will be possible, as SQL Doc will need to interrogate the entire schema to make sure the dependencies are correct. Would it help if your project was split per database rather then the whole server? You could then just run the documentation for that database. Alternatively, you could use the command line interface to automate the generation of the documentation.
4. Along those lines, for reporting purposes only, a editable section for nearly every page.
There is MS_Description for each object, or are you looking for something else?
I hope this helps. / comments
Thanks for your suggestions.
1. Search feature with the potential of a wildcard search. Example if we're looking for a certain sproc...type it in the search & it will return a web page with every ...
Thanks for your post.
Can you check to see if you're using 'Use casesensitive object definition' in your comparison?
It's under Edit Project > Options > Behaviour.
I hope this helps. / comments
Thanks for your post.
Can you check to see if you're using 'Use casesensitive object definition' in your comparison?
It's under Edit Project > Options > Behaviour.
I hope this helps.
Thanks for your post.
We have a known issue with Extended Properties that can cause NullReferenceExceptions in SQL Compare. We have a patch that fixes this particular problem that you might like to try.
More infromation and a download link can be found here
If it doesn't help, let me know and we will try and get to the bottom of it for you. / comments
Thanks for your post.
We have a known issue with Extended Properties that can cause NullReferenceExceptions in SQL Compare. We have a patch that fixes this particular problem that you might like to...
Thanks for your post.
Currently BLOBS and (Max) data types are not supported as custom keys in SQL Data Compare.
This seems to be because there is a bug in the native datareader that would cause the BLOBS to be read in their entirety, which then caused SDC to barf.
We wrote our own datareader that handled the BLOBs a lot better, but it also introduced some other more serious problems. We couldn't get the problems fixed before the release, so we went back to using the native datareader.
We have an open feature request to support BLOBs (SDC-1115) in a future version. / comments
Thanks for your post.
Currently BLOBS and (Max) data types are not supported as custom keys in SQL Data Compare.
This seems to be because there is a bug in the native datareader that would cause th...
Thanks for your reply.
I see what you mean about the 'object mapping' tab, so I've logged a feature request to make it resizable (SDC-1116).
With regards to the comparison key drop down, I have asked for this to widen when you enlarge the grid (SDC-1117). Hopefully this should help with your long key names. / comments
Thanks for your reply.
I see what you mean about the 'object mapping' tab, so I've logged a feature request to make it resizable (SDC-1116).
With regards to the comparison key drop down, I have ask...