Comments
Sort by recent activity
Hi Eddie
The problem was originally highlighted when comparing a snapshot generated from a SQL 2000 database with the original SQL 2000 database (this was a test I performed prior to an upcoming schema change). Note that comparing the original database with itself does not result in this issue so the problem seems to be related to snapshot vs database comparisons.
However the problem is repeatable under SQL 2008 R2 with a database in the 100 compatibility level and a snapshot created from the same database.
After further testing it is definitely the NULL value being assigned to the extended property that is causing the problem as assigning a value of, say, '123' causes no differences to be identified by SQL Compare.
Going back to my original example, the following statement causes a table-level difference to be indicated (although there are no differences in the SQL difference pane):
-- Extended Properties
EXEC sp_addextendedproperty N'MS_OrderBy', NULL, 'SCHEMA', N'dbo', 'TABLE', N'Test', NULL, NULL
GO
...the following statement does not cause a table-level difference to be indicated:
-- Extended Properties
EXEC sp_addextendedproperty N'MS_OrderBy', '123', 'SCHEMA', N'dbo', 'TABLE', N'Test', NULL, NULL
GO
The conversion from USER to SCHEMA in the synchronisation script is just a distraction. I'm more concerned that SQL Compare is indicating that there is a difference that doesn't actually exist, particularly as the database that I'm trying to work with has around 200 tables that each have at least one extended property with a NULL value assigned (it's a 3rd-party database that I cannot change, unfortunately). I don't really want to have to totally disable the checking of Extended Properties at the project level as the database has so many.
Thanks
Chris / comments
Hi Eddie
The problem was originally highlighted when comparing a snapshot generated from a SQL 2000 database with the original SQL 2000 database (this was a test I performed prior to an upcoming sc...
...actually looks like this is a repeat of the following post: http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/vi ... hp?t=14478
The solution presented resolves the issue that I'm experiencing.
Chris / comments
...actually looks like this is a repeat of the following post:http://www.red-gate.com/MessageBoard/vi ... hp?t=14478
The solution presented resolves the issue that I'm experiencing.
Chris
That seems to have fixed the problem that I was experiencing.
Thanks for the quick turnaround.
Chris / comments
That seems to have fixed the problem that I was experiencing.
Thanks for the quick turnaround.
Chris
Chris, I've sent an email (to the support@red-gate.com email address) which includes a set of files that should allow you to partially recreate the problem.
Please let me know how you get on.
Thanks
Chris / comments
Chris, I've sent an email (to the support@red-gate.com email address) which includes a set of files that should allow you to partially recreate the problem.
Please let me know how you get on.
Thank...
Chris, it is possible to compress the clustered index and then selectively compress nonclustered indexes as desired - altering the compression state of the clustered index does not affect the compression state of the nonclustered indexes.
Likewise, any new nonclustered indexes that are created after the clustered index has been compressed are not compressed by default and have to have the DATA_COMPRESSION option included explicitly if compression is required from the outset.
Unfortunately I'm unable to replicate the exact problem that I was experiencing before as the databases have moved on since then.
Thanks
Chris / comments
Chris, it is possible to compress the clustered index and then selectively compress nonclustered indexes as desired - altering the compression state of the clustered index does not affect the compr...
Greg.Tillman wrote:
Thanks very much for your feedback John. There will be a free 14 day trial for all versions of .NET Reflector. This will be fully functional.
In that case it should be possible to create and use a Virtual Machine for development and then simply re-install the trial version every 14 days after first rolling-back to a snapshot taken before the initial installation of Reflector. / comments
Greg.Tillman wrote:
Thanks very much for your feedback John. There will be a free 14 day trial for all versions of .NET Reflector. This will be fully functional.
In that case it should be poss...
David_S wrote:
Hi!
I'm having the same kind of problems, after installing "SQL Prompt 5", whenever I try to preview a report that I'm building in BIDS 2008 (the "SQL Server 2008 R2" edition), the Visual Studio environment completly vanished and everything is gone.
::David
Stockholm, Sweden
Just to add that I'm experiencing the same problem as David following an upgrade to SQL Prompt 5. I have to uninstall SQL Prompt 5 in order to be able to preview reports.
Following such a crash the Windows Application event log contains the following event:
Event Type: Error
Event Source: .NET Runtime
Event Category: None
Event ID: 1023
Date: 30/12/2010
Time: 08:46:51
User: N/A
Computer: DEVDT54
Description:
.NET Runtime version 2.0.50727.3615 - Fatal Execution Engine Error (7A0360B0) (80131506)
For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
I'm looking forward to a resolution of this issue so that we can confidently upgrade the version of SQL Prompt that our dev team is currently using.
Chris / comments
David_S wrote:
Hi!
I'm having the same kind of problems, after installing "SQL Prompt 5", whenever I try to preview a report that I'm building in BIDS 2008 (the "SQL Server 2008 R2" edition), th...
David Atkinson wrote:
T
Would you want your post-deployment script to be placed just before the end of the transaction?
Can you confirm that there's nothing you need to put in your post-deployment script that isn't transactionable or needs to be put after the transaction?
Hi David
Thanks for your reply.
We would need to add the code just before the end of the transaction - typically we would insert reference data into tables created earlier on in the script.
Currently there's nothing that we would want do in the proposed custom section that isn't 'transactionable', although I guess that the option to place the code inside or outside the transaction would be useful to some - maybe even providing two code entry points (one for inside the transaction, and one for outside the transaction) would offer more flexibility.
Regards
Chris / comments
David Atkinson wrote:
T
Would you want your post-deployment script to be placed just before the end of the transaction?
Can you confirm that there's nothing you need to put in your post-deployme...
David Atkinson wrote:
Thanks for the further detail. Unless someone gives us a good example of something they might want after the end of the transaction, we'll assume it's not required. We try not to add unnecessary complexity.
David
No worries.
You mentioned that this is something that is already being considered - has an expected delivery date yet been decided?
Thanks
Chris / comments
David Atkinson wrote:
Thanks for the further detail. Unless someone gives us a good example of something they might want after the end of the transaction, we'll assume it's not required. We try ...
I've just experienced the same problem, in my case deleting the following file then re-activating solved the problem:
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Red Gate\Licenses\SQL Backup_v6_0.lic
Cheers
Chris / comments
I've just experienced the same problem, in my case deleting the following file then re-activating solved the problem:
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Red Gate\Licenses\SQL Back...