Skip to content

SQL Compare

Welcome to the SQL Compare feature suggestion list. Find out more information about SQL Compare at http://www.red-gate.com/products/sql-development/sql-compare/.

If you have any questions, need help or have found a bug in SQL Compare, please visit the forums at https://forums.red-gate.com/viewforum.php?f=200 or our support portal.

SQL Compare

Categories

JUMP TO ANOTHER FORUM

252 results found

  1. Currently there are 3 output options when running sql compare via the command line /quiet /verbose and the default. I'd like to see an option between the default and verbose logging similar to the "Summary view" present in the main application.
    For example: I'd like to see the tablename that has diffs (default option) AND the name of the index on said table that is different (new summary option), but not the entire table definition (verbose option).

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. If indexes & partition schemas/functions are set to be ignored, SQL Compare should not attempt to query them. Additionally would be helpful for other object types that are ignored so that the queries are streamlined to only what is selected for compare. This would be a performance enhancement, the pain is where there is a high number of partitions where the intention is just to compare something simple like stored procedures and UDFs.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. After you specify a file path and save your filter.
    Delete the directory where the filter was saved
    Click the "Save" button again and you get an exception. Need a "Save As" function or something to override the setting you set last time.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. SQL Compare Flagged a difference between Test and Production Store Procedure but I could not see where. I had to use notepad++ compare to see a Single Space. Please make this visible in the next release.

    1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. I have found that User Defined Data Types are not scripted after stored procedures that use that data type.

    3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. There are some changes that are riskier than others, not because of the type of change, but because of the object. For example, some changes require rebuilding a table or index. This can be a simple process if there are a few hundred rows, but it's a risky, slow process if there are a few billion.

    It would be nice to add a "risk" value to certain tables, so that when I see a list of changes, I can determine if this particular object ought to be separated out as a different deployment.

    6 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. When SQL Server sets up merge replication it creates a rowguid column to maintain integrity between the tables of the publisher and subscriber. Typically this setup doesn't exist in non-prod environments which ends up generating false positives differences.

    31 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. Many people have stated this but the side by side html output was more helpful and saved more time for us.

    23 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. Please give an option to ignore Recore tables creation. I am trying to use SQLCompare in DevOps model to avoid long release timings. But if there is any data type change to a huge table then current concept of creation of recovery tables is disabling all the FK's, removing indexes and eventually creating a new table. This is very long process and not benefitting the projects. There should be an option to avoid the creation of Recovery tables. Please think in that perspective.

    16 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. I'm going through an exercise of determining object changes between versions of an app suite containing 55 databases.
    It would be nice to be able to specify which databases to compare during a single run instead of processing it one database at a time.

    12 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. Currently (v 13), there is an all-or-none project option to include or exclude object permissions across all database objects. It would be fabulous to push that option down into custom filter rules so inclusions/exclusions can happen more granularly, at an object-level. Use case: the majority of our tables use generic permissions but a small subset of tables use ActiveDrictory groups that differ by environment so we have to manage them as a special case. I'd love to be able to specify something like this as a filter rule: 'generate object permissions for all tables except tables that begin with <blah>'.

    4 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. Please bring back the compare results in a side by side compare with modify date as in compare version 12

    19 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. I liked it they it was in Version 12. we could see side by side comparison. and also you used to show the last modification date

    4 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. The report header shows only the database name. Seeing BobsDB -> BobsDB isn't useful. I would rather have something like: DevServerName.BobsDB --> ProdServerName.BobsDB

    6 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. When SQL Compare apply an automapping on column name of a table, there is a little yellow image with "Auto Map" displayed on the table. It would be nice if a menu or double click or else would be availaible to open directly the column mapping of this table. It would be faster to see the mapping applied and correct it if needed.

    7 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. Bring back the side by side html output, please!!!

    27 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. When comparing two databases it would be nice to have the ability to have objects that only exist in the target be ignored. It is somewhat dangerous to have an option that would cause objects to be dropped and it would be good to be able to not have that show.

    4 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  18. When comparing a TFS Changeset in SQL Compare it will show all schema changes that are different between the Changeset and the destination, but within a TFS Changeset, there is metadata within the Changeset to indicate which specific database objects are being changed within the Changeset. It would be a huge timesaver to allow SQL Compare to be able to only select the database objects that are actually being impacted by the Changeset by default. The situation I have is this:

    Developer 1 - Adds a table to database A and checks in the change to the development database, but…

    6 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. Display last change dates of repository for databases under SQL Source Control.

    And display also last schema change date from database.

    4 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  20. Add an additional "Compare all" button to compare all projects in the actual "Look in" folder. Show a simple is equal/different indicator on each project for the results.

    Consider using VS-style solution files or kind of meta-scp.

    This is somewhat similar to https://redgate.uservoice.com/forums/141379-sql-compare/suggestions/13517250-auto-compare-after-oping-a-project-mass-compare

    6 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Don't see your idea?