User profile for way0utwest

the order of when you do things sometimes becomes an issue. The idea with SOC is that it's always linked between your branch and the db. If you unlink, relink, you'll get into strange places. The goal here is to get changes from your VCS into the db first, since those can be made by other users, and then try to get your changes in there. In this case, I think you confused this by linking after doing work. The idea with a live database is that you are pulling to a blank VCS system, not using this to get changes to/from the VCS. That's a model that is fraught with issues. / comments

the order of when you do things sometimes becomes an issue. The idea with SOC is that it's always linked between your branch and the db. If you unlink, relink, you'll get into strange places. The g...

0 votes

With my style, I get this: <div>IF @CalculateHeld = 'Yes'</div><div>BEGIN</div><div>    SELECT *</div><div>    FROM [#HeldFunds]</div><div>    WHERE [HeldAmount] > 0;</div><div>    DROP TABLE [#HeldFunds];</div><div>END;</div><div>ELSE</div><div>BEGIN</div><div>    SELECT *</div><div>    FROM [#HeldFunds2]</div><div>    WHERE [HeldAmount] > 0;</div><div>    DROP TABLE [#HeldFunds2];</div><div>END;<br></div> What I'd suggest is look at the whitespace and the control flow sections. Watch out for checking the "wrap if longer than" items. I've had some strange behavior here when these are applied with certain values. / comments

With my style, I get this:<div>IF @CalculateHeld = 'Yes'</div><div>BEGIN</div><div>    SELECT *</div><div>    FROM [#HeldFunds]</div><div>    WHERE [HeldAmount] > 0;</...

0 votes

Honestly, what to do here is actually fix this as a part of build and fail the build if the constraint isn't named with doso standard. This for a couple things. Developers actively consider the constraint more and you also ensure no duplicate constraints get generated by using a standard That being said, it would be nice for SCA to generate these according to some pattern and offer to fix your dev db / comments

Honestly, what to do here is actually fix this as a part of build and fail the build if the constraint isn't named with doso standard. This for a couple things. Developers actively consider the con...

0 votes

There is no workaround here. The solution is to name your constraints. They should be consistently named in all environments to ensure you can alter/drop them easily. / comments

There is no workaround here. The solution is to name your constraints. They should be consistently named in all environments to ensure you can alter/drop them easily.

0 votes

I don't mean to distract you or avoid the question, but there are a couple things in here that I want to point out. First, there's no magic on how to make changes. When we alter a table, there are really only a couple things that can be done in SQL Server to change a table. All of us are bound by the rules of the database engine for making changes, and we can't avoid those rules in terms of meta data only changes, or rewriting pages, or anything else. Second, the issues with large tables exist with small ones, but because of the scale or duration of changes (or resources), we don't notice them as much. We also can recover quicker, just because a rebuild/copy/etc, of 100 rows in inherently less disruptive that it is with 1,000,000,000 rows. Now, some of the issues with DACPAC changes are that you lack control in how you would prefer to make these changes. Similar issues can occur with SQL Compare, though I think Redgate does a better job of warning you and giving you a script to review. With SQL Change Automation (SCA), if you are tracking these changes in VS as migration scripts, you have complete control over how to make the change. We can't mitigate a bad decision, like locking a 1,000,000,000 row table to add and change data or rebuild an index. You might have valid reasons to make that change. We do suggest ways to make some changes, but at the time of migration script import, you need to ensure that you review the method of making the change. The advantage of SCA is that we give you complete control to decide how the change should be deployed. We don't necessarily give you the best method for your environment, since the requirements and restrictions vary by application, but we allow you to write the code that suits you. This means you need to understand how to make large table changes effectively in your world. There numerous ways to approach problems and you ought to research the best ways. A few ideas - https://sqlstudies.com/2016/07/14/altering-a-column-in-a-large-table-a-case-study/ - https://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic851917-1550-1.aspx - https://www.red-gate.com/simple-talk/sql/database-administration/changing-data-types-large-tables-int-bigint-conundrum/ - https://serverfault.com/questions/36696/how-to-speed-up-adding-column-to-large-table-in-sql-server Note there are other methods, and you might need to experiment with how the different methods of making changes affect your system. Then incorporate those in your process and use them in your migration scripts. If you are using SQL Source Control, what I would recommend is that you review the scripts for ALTER TABLE changes and perhaps rewrite them. This won't flow through in your development environments necessarily, as the SCA cmdlets will still do what they do, but in smaller environments, some of these long or lengthy deployments usually don't matter if you rebuild the environment. However, for deployment to QA, Staging, Production, for the moment of the change, you'll want a real script to be used. In these cases, I'd use the new pre/post options for the table changes, and then comment out the alter in the regular script if you don't want it. / comments

I don't mean to distract you or avoid the question, but there are a couple things in here that I want to point out.First, there's no magic on how to make changes. When we alter a table, there are r...

0 votes

I would definitely investigate with whoever handles the networking and verify that things are setup correctly between the system, DNS, and AD. / comments

I would definitely investigate with whoever handles the networking and verify that things are setup correctly between the system, DNS, and AD.

0 votes

Are you adding the virtual server or the node itself? Can you disclose some of the names/setup? / comments

Are you adding the virtual server or the node itself? Can you disclose some of the names/setup?

0 votes

We don't have an option to do this, though that's interesting. If you post this on UserVoice, perhaps some others would vote for this. I'm not sure this is a high priority, but maybe if there is enough interest, it would get on the enhancement list. / comments

We don't have an option to do this, though that's interesting. If you post this on UserVoice, perhaps some others would vote for this. I'm not sure this is a high priority, but maybe if there is en...

0 votes

That makes sense, as I wasn't sure how often the schema in those tables changes. Synonyms are a hack, and I understand here this being an issue. Exclude might work, but in talking with the team, they said this sometimes still pulls in dependencies, so you might need to see if this works for you. If it doesn't, maybe the really hacky way to do this is import the migration script and then comment it out completely. This would allow the migration to get deployed with zero effect. You could even include a comment inside the comment that this was an external change from a third party upgrade/patch. It's not the best, but for now, we don't have a good way to ensuring we can walk a dependency tree while also supporting just partial project changes. There is some work being done on dependencies, but no idea what this will go through the Compare engine, which is what is used here in the SCA process. / comments

That makes sense, as I wasn't sure how often the schema in those tables changes. Synonyms are a hack, and I understand here this being an issue.Exclude might work, but in talking with the team, the...

0 votes

I just found this in the docs as well. I haven't tried this, but will attempt to get to it. This might help you: https://documentation.red-gate.com/sca3/developing-databases-using-sql-change-automation/advanced-project-manipulation/partial-projects / comments

I just found this in the docs as well. I haven't tried this, but will attempt to get to it. This might help you: https://documentation.red-gate.com/sca3/developing-databases-using-sql-change-automa...

0 votes

How can we help you today?

way0utwest

Comments