Create migration script without changes to any database objects
It would be great if you could add just a migrations script to your source control without any related change to any object in the database. This would be very use ful when tyou have tabel A with column 1 and 2 and i column 2 you want to replace all 'A' with 'a' or something.
Provide a way to check in a SQL Script that changes Data as an migration script without any schema or static Data changes.
That will help us track all our changes to the database and maintain proper order.
We are addressing this request with the new migrations feature in SQL Source Control 5. For more information about the feature, please take a look at https://redgate.uservoice.com/forums/39019-sql-source-control/suggestions/2299881-migrations-support-for-git-mercurial
Thanks for being patient.
Hi Guys, very good product but does not make any sense if it is not creating any migration script for for Data Change. Please fix it asap or lose customer.
I am also trying to implement the automated deployment. But I am not able to integrate the custom script to source control. I think this is very important for automation. Any one from please let us know what is the ETA for this? .
Ther's another suggestion for the same thing with more votes already. https://redgate.uservoice.com/forums/39019-sql-source-control/suggestions/2565864-create-migration-script-without-changes-to-any-dat
Brendan Stewart commented
Simon de Kraa commented
We need this functionality as well. We use Workflow Foundation and store the Workflow definitions in the database. Having the correct definitions is essential.
At the moment you get the following error message: http://imageshack.us/a/img32/8915/datamigration.jpg.
Brad Wood commented
Yes, please. Every release we have back fill scripts that affect non-static data and this is causing an issue for us now that we are trying to completely automate our DB deployments and need EVERYTHING committed as a migration script.
See this thread I started on the topic (before I found this User Voice request):
AdminDavid Atkinson (Admin, Redgate) commented
The workaround for this is to prefix or suffix the code to a schema change. It's not ideal, but should work. Please vote for this issue if it affects you and hopefully we'll be able to implement a better fix.