Allow comparing objects of all types with different names, not just tables.
It would be nice to be able to use RGSC to compare such objects by re-mapping. A recent change allows doing this, but with tables only. All other objects would be a helpful touch.
This could be useful for several scenarios, including demonstrating a proposed change to a current version. We also sometimes end up with different test versions of objects that differ slightly with less than helpful comments. (b/c all our devs' code is self documenting!)
+1 for this feature. It is exactly what I need today.
Tom G commented
I second that. It's a major PITA to see all objects with slightly modified name, i.e. stored procedures / views / triggers / functions / logins etc show up as drop and then create.
Please consolidate the very limited table mapping & owner mapping screen to just be a single mapping screen, and allow mapping of all objects, not just tables.
Thanks a lot!
Patrick Mundy commented
Most definitely can profit from leveraging the compare process to compare two different functional objects (views, functions, stored procedures, triggers) with different names.
It'd be awesome if we could just compare two objects with different names. Have an option to select server, database, object type, object 1, object 2. You have an awesome GUI for displaying results, wished this was an option for it.
David Potter commented
From time to time.. we migrate apps to new versions and often object name changes. Currently I have to go back and create a dummy version with the old name to get the software to compare. Would be nice to be able to override mapping and tell the software to compare two objects.
Azmat Tejani commented
This is something I need as well. Currently I have to save the SPs to file before comparing them.
Helena Cooper commented
Mapping stored procedures manually would be a great addition, we're in the middle of changing the naming conventions for some objects in our production database and I need to compare the live copy with the development version - the SPs should match perfectly for content but due to the different names I can't currently automate comparison.
Alan Spillert commented
Why not let me tell SC the names of two procedures and you compare? If they are completely different the result would be garbage, but if similar I could see what is different.
I agree. I need to be able to compare a table to a view.
In addition i would like to be able to export my mappings. We recently went through a large database re-factoring project and I want to export my mappings to the development team. So they would know what became what.
Shawn Karr commented
I agree. I have run into two cases where I wanted to use the tool but automatic mapping was not up to the job for tables, views or stored procedures. Any of these element names could change and it is annoying that I cannot map when it makes sense.
I have also begun using schema to differentiate parts of a monolithic legacy database which means for those elements, automatic mapping is not working.
A similar type of change involved consolidating two related databases again using schema to differentiate. Wanted to compare the original database to the related portion of the new. Not surprised that the automatic mapping failed in this case also but if I could map the views and stored procedures it could have been done.