Comments
Sort by recent activity
Thanks for your post.
Unfortunatly, as indexes are not treated as objects in their own right, you do not have the control to select which ones you want to ignore in the current.
We are planning to add this feature to the next major version of SQL Compare. For your reference the feature tracking code is SC-2447. / comments
Thanks for your post.
Unfortunatly, as indexes are not treated as objects in their own right, you do not have the control to select which ones you want to ignore in the current.
We are planning to ...
Thanks for your post.
The foreign keys are shown 'grayed' as they are not treated as objects in their own right, and cannot be checked or unchecked.
Once the tables are added to the diagram, you can select the table object and you will see the FK shown in the 'Dependencies' in the bottom right.
If you want to see the FK as an object on the diagram, you can select 'View' > 'Constraints as Objects'
I hope this is helpful. / comments
Thanks for your post.
The foreign keys are shown 'grayed' as they are not treated as objects in their own right, and cannot be checked or unchecked.
Once the tables are added to the diagram, you ca...
Thanks for your post.
The behaviour of the option should be consistent with the definition, so I'm not sure why it's working differently with your database. It seems to work as expected when I tested it.
Would you be able to send me the structure of the object that exhibits this behaviour and I will see if I can recreate the problem? / comments
Thanks for your post.
The behaviour of the option should be consistent with the definition, so I'm not sure why it's working differently with your database. It seems to work as expected when I test...
Thanks for your post.
Unfortunatly this still isn't possible. SQL Comapre will create the scripts based on the target database version, rather than the compatiability mode, as this is a much safer way of doing things.
SQL Comapre will always create the scripts in the format of the target database, so if the databse is a SQL 2005 in comp mode 80, it will create scripts that run on SQL 2005 in comp mode 80, not scripts for a SQL 2000 database.
However, we have an open feature request to allow the user to force SQL compare to create the scripts targeting a specific version, which I have asked the development team to review again. For your reference the feature tracking code for this is SC-3517.
As a workaround, you could sync the SQL 2005 comp mode 80 database to a SQL 2000 server, and then use the SQL 2000 database as the target for the scripts. / comments
Thanks for your post.
Unfortunatly this still isn't possible. SQL Comapre will create the scripts based on the target database version, rather than the compatiability mode, as this is a much safer ...
Oh ok, no problem.
The option your're looking for is:
Options.IgnoreKeys / comments
Oh ok, no problem.
The option your're looking for is:
Options.IgnoreKeys
Thanks for your post.
Are you refering to sycnhronizing the schema or the data?
If you are perfroming a schema synchronisation using SQL Compare, you can use the option 'Ignore Foreign Keys' which means that the script will not sync the foreign keys.
If you are using SQL Data Compare for a Data sync' then SQL Data compare will detect the foreign keys on the target databse and give you the oportuntity to disable them for the purposes sync.
Can you give me an example of what you think shouldn't be happening? / comments
Thanks for your post.
Are you refering to sycnhronizing the schema or the data?
If you are perfroming a schema synchronisation using SQL Compare, you can use the option 'Ignore Foreign Keys' which ...
Thanks for your post.
This is indeed possible with SQL Data Compare.
Can you try the option 'Drop Primary Keys, Indexes, and unique constraints'?
Options > Synchronization Behaviour
I hope this helps. / comments
Thanks for your post.
This is indeed possible with SQL Data Compare.
Can you try the option 'Drop Primary Keys, Indexes, and unique constraints'?
Options > Synchronization Behaviour
I hope this helps.
We now have a patch that fixes this: http://www.red-gate.com/messageboard/vi ... php?t=9880 / comments
We now have a patch that fixes this:http://www.red-gate.com/messageboard/vi ... php?t=9880
Would you be able to give me the table structures for the source and target tables, and also let me know if you have used any WHERE clause in the comparison?
Can you also let me know what you used for a comaprison key? / comments
Would you be able to give me the table structures for the source and target tables, and also let me know if you have used any WHERE clause in the comparison?
Can you also let me know what you used ...
Thanks for your post.
Can you try using the 'force binary collation' option, and see if that helps.
If not, can you let me know which collations you have set for the source and target columns, and I'll try and recreate your issue. / comments
Thanks for your post.
Can you try using the 'force binary collation' option, and see if that helps.
If not, can you let me know which collations you have set for the source and target columns, and ...