Comments
Sort by recent activity
Thanks for your patience on this issue.
It looks like the problem is indeed a bug with SQL Compare. Development have identified the issue, but have also noted that it is going to be quite hard to fix. At this stage it is planned to be fixed for the next point release of SQL Compare 7.
For your reference the bug tracking number is SC-3953. I have added a watch to the issue, so I will keep you updated with any developments. / comments
Thanks for your patience on this issue.
It looks like the problem is indeed a bug with SQL Compare. Development have identified the issue, but have also noted that it is going to be quite hard to f...
Thanks for your post.
When you use SQL Compare 6 to synchronise two database schemas, in essence it will modify database B to be exactly the same as database A (depending on options set). If you alter the primary key of a table in database A, then when you synchronise the database, by default it will implement the change on the secondary database.
Any changes you make to the source database will be reflected in the change script for the target database.
If you are more concerned that manually changing the column data type through SQL could leave inconsistent definitions in views, stored procedures, functions etc, then you do not need to worry as the column data type is only defined in the CREATE table statement for the object. Therefore the table definition is the only place you need to change it. You may wish to use SQL Dependency Tracker to investigate if any variables in a dependent function or stored procedure conflict with the new data type, however making any changes would be a manual process.
I hope this is helpful.
Let me know if you need any more information. / comments
Thanks for your post.
When you use SQL Compare 6 to synchronise two database schemas, in essence it will modify database B to be exactly the same as database A (depending on options set). If you al...
Thanks for your post.
As you have discovered, SQL Prompt (3.6) does not yet support service broker objects. This is something that has been scheduled to be included in a future version, however at the time of writing this no exact version has been assigned.
For your reference the feature number is SP-768.
I have linked your forum post to the feature, so we can update you when we know when you can expect the feature to be implemented. / comments
Thanks for your post.
As you have discovered, SQL Prompt (3.6) does not yet support service broker objects. This is something that has been scheduled to be included in a future version, however at ...
Thanks for your post.
We have had this issue reported to us on one previous occasion. The problem turned out to be related to some entries that are left over when you uninstall some Novell client software.
Can you take a look at the advice at the following location: http://rumkin.com/reference/problems/csnw.php
Let me know if this doesn't help. / comments
Thanks for your post.
We have had this issue reported to us on one previous occasion. The problem turned out to be related to some entries that are left over when you uninstall some Novell client s...
Thanks for your post.
You should be able to accomplish this by editing the project and going to the 'Tables & Views' tab.
On this screen you can select the custom comparison keys that you wish to use for the purposes of the comparison. Click in the comparison key field for the object that you wish pick your own comparison key, then change the comparison key to 'custom' and tick the column you wish to use for the comparison.
Also, if you only wish to sync a particular column, you can select/deselect the other columns in the comparison in the 'Columns In Comparison' field on the right-hand side. The columns that are selecting in this grid are reflected in the comparison and in the synchronisation.
I hope this is what you were looking to achieve.
Let me know if you need any more information. / comments
Thanks for your post.
You should be able to accomplish this by editing the project and going to the 'Tables & Views' tab.
On this screen you can select the custom comparison keys that you wish to u...
Thanks for your suggestion.
I have logged it under the code DT-453. The request is now being reviewed by developers and will hopefully be considered for the next version of the tool. / comments
Thanks for your suggestion.
I have logged it under the code DT-453. The request is now being reviewed by developers and will hopefully be considered for the next version of the tool.
Thanks for your suggestion.
I have logged it under the code DT-454. The request is now being reviewed by developers and will hopefully be considered for the next version of the tool. / comments
Thanks for your suggestion.
I have logged it under the code DT-454. The request is now being reviewed by developers and will hopefully be considered for the next version of the tool.
Thanks for your post.
As long as you can connect from the SQL Data Compare client to the hosted SQL Server using SQL or Windows Authentication, then you shouldn't have any issues synchronising. / comments
Thanks for your post.
As long as you can connect from the SQL Data Compare client to the hosted SQL Server using SQL or Windows Authentication, then you shouldn't have any issues synchronising.
Thanks for your post.
I have passed on your suggestion to the developers. Hopefully it will be implemented in a future version.
For your reference the bug tracking number is SB-3426, I have added a watch to the issue so I can update you whenever the status on the request changes.
Let me know if you need any more information. / comments
Thanks for your post.
I have passed on your suggestion to the developers. Hopefully it will be implemented in a future version.
For your reference the bug tracking number is SB-3426, I have added a...
Thanks for your post.
The setup that you have described is a pretty typical backup strategy. I would just like to note that you will need to make sure that the full backups and the t-log backups do not occur at the same time, but this should be fairly easy to configure.
With regards to the 'remove inactive entries' transaction log backup option, if you uncheck this option the backup will not truncate the transaction log. Unless you have any particular reason why you would not want to truncate the transaction log, you may as well keep this option selected and always truncate the transaction log. Here is some information on transaction log truncating: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189085.aspx
This would mean that a more simple strategy could be implemented. A daily full backup, followed by a t-log backup every 30 mins.
I hope this is useful.
Let me know if you need any further information. / comments
Thanks for your post.
The setup that you have described is a pretty typical backup strategy. I would just like to note that you will need to make sure that the full backups and the t-log backups do...