Comments
Sort by recent activity
"Ignore this" implemented somehow ASAP - dealing with cross-domain Login mismatches and DB Role mismatches as well, and all the mismatches due to sp_MS% for every arbitrarilly named Replication byproduct means I really can't see the wood for the trees... I'll still use the add-in because it's workable, but with 50 and more objects to have to ignore every time I look at the offsite Production box you can imagine it gets OLD very quickly - and I've only been using SSC for THREE DAYS!
Please add my vote for swift inclusion of a workable "Ignore Feature".
Thanks for listening... / comments
"Ignore this" implemented somehow ASAP - dealing with cross-domain Login mismatches and DB Role mismatches as well, and all the mismatches due to sp_MS% for every arbitrarilly named Replication byp...
Yes, please do ignore replication objects by default. The numbers following the SPs vary from instance to instance, so there's no real correlation there. In my case, we have but 5 PUB-SUBs in Production, only 2 in QA and development. Definitely care ZERO about Source Control for the generated objects, but I would like to source control each of the PUB-SUB CREATE scripts...
Thanks for asking, David. / comments
Yes, please do ignore replication objects by default. The numbers following the SPs vary from instance to instance, so there's no real correlation there. In my case, we have but 5 PUB-SUBs in Prod...
SQL Compare has never been used here - I'm the new DB guy at the new company and am bringing in RG's tools having had great success with them for the last 5+ years.
I'll have to run the issue of "starting over" by my Director - it would be very sad to be unable to use integrated source control as the existing "maintain a set of source folders by database and object type and a separate set of 'release' folders" is a TOTAL pain! Deployment is nightmare and I've already found dozens of inconsistencies between Production and other environments that should, ostensibly, be the same.
The objects are in SVN as simple "create <<object>> ..." scripts, EXACTLY taken from SSMS' "script object as 'CREATE'" right-click or "script database". Why there would be an obstacle to making SQL Source Control able to simply recognize these items seems to be a question begging an answer... / comments
SQL Compare has never been used here - I'm the new DB guy at the new company and am bringing in RG's tools having had great success with them for the last 5+ years.
I'll have to run the issue of "s...
Thanks for taking the time to consider the problem I'm facing. / comments
Thanks for taking the time to consider the problem I'm facing.
Of the 3 alert categories, this is the only one that causes the problem.
Alert Service restarted. UI bombs. / comments
Of the 3 alert categories, this is the only one that causes the problem.
Alert Service restarted. UI bombs.
I created a number of scalar functions that I want to be available across all databases, e.g, fn_lpad (the equivalent of Oracle's LPAD) and a multi-transform function fn_transform (like Oracle's TRANSFORM), along with a number of others. Although they are UDF's, to make them available as desired, I add them to the master DB in the system_function_schema, but to do that I need the "header and footer" commands as described in my original post.
If SQL Compare isn't designed to do this, that's OK. I did generate the entire migration script using SQL Compare against the two master DBs, so to add the commands myself in QA is no great hardship. PLEASE don't disallow master-to-master compares and script generation in future releases!!! [image]
Great Product - used nigh on daily - wish we had an Oracle version when I was shackled to that DB! / comments
I created a number of scalar functions that I want to be available across all databases, e.g, fn_lpad (the equivalent of Oracle's LPAD) and a multi-transform function fn_transform (like Oracle's TR...
I'd say it's a MUST HAVE for those doing any kind of impact analysis and having to document it (like I need RIGHT NOW!!! :shock:)
Add 1 to the votes for this, please... :-)
Export to
. Excel
. tab-delimited on clipboard
would be fine for starters, with the column headings, of course. / comments
I'd say it's a MUST HAVE for those doing any kind of impact analysis and having to document it (like I need RIGHT NOW!!! :shock:)
Add 1 to the votes for this, please... :-)
Export to
. Excel
. tab...
+1 for the regex inclusion / comments
+1 for the regex inclusion
If you hook in the "standard object explorer menu", doesn't that mean that scripts generated will be in the AWFUL "all the code in a quoted-string" representation?
If so, PLEASE DON'T DO THAT wholesale! Please, give us an option to choose "Red-Gate format scripts" (like those that SQL Prompt generates) vs. "Standard SSMS format scripts". / comments
If you hook in the "standard object explorer menu", doesn't that mean that scripts generated will be in the AWFUL "all the code in a quoted-string" representation?
If so, PLEASE DON'T DO THAT whole...
If you generate the script for especially SPs and UDFs in "not like SSMS does 'script as'", +1 for this feature. / comments
If you generate the script for especially SPs and UDFs in "not like SSMS does 'script as'", +1 for this feature.