Comments
Sort by recent activity
Hello Antony_Schweitzer, What you're describing, could be technically possible, but from a workflow perspective is likely undesirable for reasons I'll explore in a moment. Please could you explain how this would be desirable to you? I'm assuming you mean two different dev dbs, rather than 2 very similar dbs with minor differences due to pursuing different development branches. If I'm mistaken please say. As detailed here Flyway Desktop - development database environment configuration If you have entirely different sources feeding in, you are liable to hit the same type of issues as if you were using shared development since you'll suffer from a lack of visibility of merge conflicts and potentially wiping out beneficial changes downstream. The preferred format, for both ease of development and accuracy of migrations is each dev to have their own local instance and then committing their resulting changes to a central repository, giving you a single 'source of truth', which then can be applied to your target db. / comments
Hello Antony_Schweitzer,What you're describing, could be technically possible, but from a workflow perspective is likely undesirable for reasons I'll explore in a moment. Please could you explain h...
Thank you for clarifying, I'm afraid this functionality isn't explicitly available in SQL Change Automation, however you might be able to get closer to what you want. By editing the programmable objects grouping, you could sort them by object type rather than schema (the default), could that htne make the deployment ordering definition easier? https://documentation.red-gate.com/sca/developing-databases/concepts/migrations/programmable-objects referencing https://documentation.red-gate.com/sca/reference/sql-change-automation-project-settings / comments
Thank you for clarifying, I'm afraid this functionality isn't explicitly available in SQL Change Automation, however you might be able to get closer to what you want.By editing the programmable obj...
Hello dbuenosilva, Thanks for your question Diego, are you looking to set the definition once and then have that order respected? If so, this solution should work for you, it may be worth checking that EvaluateExecutionOrderOnImport is correctly set so your changes aren't overwritten. https://documentation.red-gate.com/sca/developing-databases/working-with-the-visual-studio-extension/advanced-scenarios-for-visual-studio/customizing-programmable-object-deployment-order-in-visual-studio Or were you looking to uniformly alter the deployment order by type, so views would be deployed first, then sprocs? / comments
Hello dbuenosilva,Thanks for your question Diego, are you looking to set the definition once and then have that order respected?If so, this solution should work for you, it may be worth checking th...
Hi Souviksahoo, As you've likely noticed, ADO only automatically maps non-secret variables. Secret ones need an additional step, please see the following guide for advice and an example. https://documentation.red-gate.com/sca/deploying-database-changes/add-ons/azure-devops/access-azure-devops-pipeline-secret-variable-from-sql-scripts / comments
Hi Souviksahoo,As you've likely noticed, ADO only automatically maps non-secret variables. Secret ones need an additional step, please see the following guide for advice and an example.https://docu...
Hi EKelly, That is indeed the appropriate setting to change, please can you tell us a little more about your setup? Are you using a SQL Source Control Project as your source or is it exclusively SQL Change automation. What version are you using and what implementation please? (SSMS, VS, CLI, Azure plugin etc) / comments
Hi EKelly, That is indeed the appropriate setting to change, please can you tell us a little more about your setup?Are you using a SQL Source Control Project as your source or is it exclusively SQL...
Hi Axess I'm afraid this isn't something that's on the roadmap currently. One tentative offering that might work, but arguably might be more trouble than it's worth is calling the libraries via reflection. However obfuscation and reflection famously don't get along so I'd keep the implementation as simple as possible, which may not be viable with your needs. / comments
Hi Axess I'm afraid this isn't something that's on the roadmap currently.One tentative offering that might work, but arguably might be more trouble than it's worth is calling the libraries via refl...
Hi maxschafintact, Thanks for reporting, repo'ed and confirmed, will raise with development. / comments
Hi maxschafintact,Thanks for reporting, repo'ed and confirmed, will raise with development.
"I think FD should start syncing if it gets focus and branch was changed." This is now how FD behaves, it will recheck each time it gains focus. So invoking this in your Git interface, seeing it complete and the refocusing of FD should prevent any stale data. / comments
"I think FD should start syncing if it gets focus and branch was changed."This is now how FD behaves, it will recheck each time it gains focus. So invoking this in your Git interface, seeing it com...
Hi adante111, From Smart Assembly version 7 and onwards, you can programmatically license and unlicensed the tooling on demand. An example of this can be seen here were we guide people on how to set up a Azure pipeline and dynamically license and unlicense the product. https://documentation.red-gate.com/sa/building-your-assembly/using-smartassembly-with-azure-pipelines Not only are you entirely welcome to move them around, we anticipate people doing so, they are you licenses, please use them as you see fit. If you wish to check the licensing conditions you can do so here https://www.red-gate.com/support/license/ The only enforced element is that you don't go over your license allocation, but as long as you are unlicensing your build servers before licensing new ones that shouldn't be an issue. Should you have a large number of licenses, the portal that you highlighted is likely the easiest way to achieve centralised management. If it would give you peace of mind, I'd be happy to sent you a trial license key that you could activate and deactivate at your leisure without any impact to your existing pipeline. / comments
Hi adante111, From Smart Assembly version 7 and onwards, you can programmatically license and unlicensed the tooling on demand. An example of this can be seen here were we guide people on how to se...
Hello JeffElliott, I've only ever seen this instance once before and the origin of the behaviour was never found, given your file has traversed 12 years worth of versions I'm not very optimistic about isolating the cause. There were multiple breaking changes in version 7 & 8 as well as a major rearchitecture in v6.5. The approach I'd recommend is back up your original files and then duplicate them. On the copies, please remove the duplicate entries with the null token value and try using them at normal. Smart Assembly and I would not expect to see duplicate entries for assemblies, while it will likely simply take the first reference it finds there's no guarantee that would be the correct ones. Please let us know if you have any issues. / comments
Hello JeffElliott, I've only ever seen this instance once before and the origin of the behaviour was never found, given your file has traversed 12 years worth of versions I'm not very optimistic a...