110 results found

1. Provide option to include USE statement in deployment script (just like SQL Compare)

   Currently, we have to manually edit every SQL Data Compare deployment script to add a USE <DB> statement at the top. We would like to see an option in the tool like SQL Compare has.

   14 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   1 comment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

2. Add the ability to ignore specific column types, specifically datetime types.

   My primary usage as QA is to use some DB as a baseline, run old code against it, run new code against it, and compare the results. Most of the differences are the times that records were updated or other time related fields. I am only interested in the data differences. All of the datetime field differences clutter the comparison and increase my analysis time by about a factor of 20.
   I know I could go in and manually find all of the datetime fields in each of the 300-600 tables (depending on the DB) and un-check all the datetime fields for each project, but that is also extremely time consuming.

   My primary usage as QA is to use some DB as a baseline, run old code against it, run new code against it, and compare the results. Most of the differences are the times that records were updated or other time related fields. I am only interested in the data differences. All of the datetime field differences clutter the comparison and increase my analysis time by about a factor of 20.
   I know I could go in and manually find all of the datetime fields in each of the 300-600 tables (depending on the DB) and un-check all the datetime… more

   14 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

3. Use the same"Where Clauses"

   Ability to use the same "where clauses" that has been set up for one server and when we change the data source to another server with same dbase schema it has to use the same where clauses that I've already been set up.

   13 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

4. Disable unique constraint indexes

   If a table has a unique constraint index on say the name column and the change is just sapping the names on the IDs. The script to update the names ends up failing because it causes a unique constraint violation, but if the index is disable, then the update runs, then the index is rebuilt the unique constraint does not cause a failure.

   12 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   1 comment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

5. Add the possibility to trim leading white space

   An option for trailing white space does already exist. Unfortunately there is no option for leading white space yet. This would be very useful and propably is no big deal to implement.

   12 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

6. Make the target (server+database) independent of the data set (tables and views)

   I'd like to store in a Data Compare project file a list of targets that I can select very easily. A target is server+database. It includes credentials as well. I don't want to re-enter them all the time.

   I don't want to make many project files for them.

   The same is true for a selection of tables and views. I compare very large database and I need different subsets of tables depending on the current task I'm working on.

   Again, why a separate project file for them? I don't want that.

   Given that I need to vary both target and data sets I would require a quadratic number of project files! And what if I need to change other settings. I then would need to update quadratically many project files for that.

   This would be very valuable. I spend easily 25% of the time using the product configuring these things. And it's such an annoying kind of work.

   I'd like to store in a Data Compare project file a list of targets that I can select very easily. A target is server+database. It includes credentials as well. I don't want to re-enter them all the time.

   I don't want to make many project files for them.

   The same is true for a selection of tables and views. I compare very large database and I need different subsets of tables depending on the current task I'm working on.

   Again, why a separate project file for them? I don't want that.

   Given that I need to vary both target and… more

   11 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

7. compare two tables in the same database

   I don't see why the tables have to reside in different databases, backup, source control, or scripts folder in order to run SQL Data Compare.

   It wouldn't be much fuzz to add the ability to compare two tables regardless (i.e. in the same database). Sometimes I just need to divide the common traits from the differences, in order to plan some work.

   11 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   1 comment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

8. Show how many records have been processed in a table (useful for large tables)

   It would be real nice to have a counter displayed on the "SQL Data Compare - Running" screen that shows which record number is being processed for a given table, for example "Processing record X of Y total records". This would be useful for large tables that have lots of binary data (images, files, etc.). This would help us determine whether or not SQL Data Compare is stuck in a loop. Right now the tool does show which table is being compared, which is useful, however, we have one table that has 25 GB of data in it (mostly PDF files and images), so I know the comparison process will be slow. Seeing an actual counter would help us know if any progress is being made. I realize that updating this counter might slow down the comparison process, so perhaps there could be a setting to turn this feature off or on.

   It would be real nice to have a counter displayed on the "SQL Data Compare - Running" screen that shows which record number is being processed for a given table, for example "Processing record X of Y total records". This would be useful for large tables that have lots of binary data (images, files, etc.). This would help us determine whether or not SQL Data Compare is stuck in a loop. Right now the tool does show which table is being compared, which is useful, however, we have one table that has 25 GB of data in it (mostly PDF… more

   11 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

9. Add support to export comparison results to MS Excel

   Can we please get the ability to export the contents of the SQL Data Compare results window (containing the rows with differences) to Excel, complete with the cell formatting seen in the application? I.e. headers for fields with differences in bold, cells with differences highlighted a different colour, etc.

   This functionality exists in SQL Prompt (exporting from SSMS, admittedly without the formatting) so surely should be possible from Data Compare also?

   Even better would be to be able to do this for all tables/subsets selected in the list of tables above the results window (i.e. all the data included by the boxes ticked).

   Context:
   I use data compare a lot to analyse the impact of changes to code while developing - it provides a convenient way to do row-by-row comparisons without having to write the queries to identify the differences myself. However, where the product falls down in my opinion is the ability to export these results to a file where they can be used for further analysis. I have tried the CSV export and found it to be less hassle to write queries myself, to get something I can easily use.

   I am happy to discuss this with a member of the RedGate team. Thank you.

   Can we please get the ability to export the contents of the SQL Data Compare results window (containing the rows with differences) to Excel, complete with the cell formatting seen in the application? I.e. headers for fields with differences in bold, cells with differences highlighted a different colour, etc.

   This functionality exists in SQL Prompt (exporting from SSMS, admittedly without the formatting) so surely should be possible from Data Compare also?

   Even better would be to be able to do this for all tables/subsets selected in the list of tables above the results window (i.e. all the data included by… more

   11 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

10. Speed It Up on LARGE Databases

    I created a new project. DB has 2004 tables. I only care about ONE db schema - "pricemanager", so, about 20 tables, of which I care to compare just 11. It takes nearly five full minutes just to get a tables and views page I can choose from.

    WHY, can I not simply "FILTER BEFORE RETRIEVAL"? I know what I want, and it isn't 2000+ tables and 5000+indexes, et al.

    I JUST upgraded to 13.4.5.6953 in hopes of some speed improvement
    - all hopes were dashed when it ground on for the usual 5 mins.

    need to eliminate the 4 typical "who" columns for each of my 11 tables bearing these columns. This is, arguably, one of the WORST experiences a Product has to offer... It is SO slow!

    It is plain ridiculous to have to wait another five to ten minutes (NO EXAGGERATION) for every table I need to simply omit columns from... And while here, it is also RIDICULOUS that to edit my project to include another table, I have to wait ANOTHER FIVE MINUTES for "it" to go back to the DBs I already went to, just to collect the SAME objects, in the SAME state... GIVE US A "DO NOT RE-READ SCHEMA" OPTION! (Both while we have a project open and need to edit, OR when we first open SQDC - allow us to say, "JUST GET MY PROJECT'S CHECKED TABLES OBJECT DEFINITIONS" (getting 11 instead of 2004, now that's a speed-up waiting to happen...)

    I cannot attest to this Product being a "productivity enhancer" - simply because I waste tens of minutes while unnecessary schema reads are repeatedly done, and "it" goes off into la-la land simply when I exclude 4 columns from the a table compare! Shocking it should be this bad at Version 13!

    And, when I have the GRID of results on show, GIVE ME A RIGHT-CLICK TO EXCLUDE A COLUMN, there and then, while the grid is on view - and "REFRESH JUST THIS TABLE" taking into account newly excluded columns... SO. MUCH. FASTER. (Mark this "un-map" in the Project, too, PLEASE)

    And this is on a MacBook Pro, with i7 processor and 16GB RAM, and SSD, so it's no slouch - and the servers are via wired 10GB Ethernet, about 150ft away, so no network latency.

    ANY pointers RG can give to make this a usable tool would be greatly appreciated!

    I created a new project. DB has 2004 tables. I only care about ONE db schema - "pricemanager", so, about 20 tables, of which I care to compare just 11. It takes nearly five full minutes just to get a tables and views page I can choose from.

    WHY, can I not simply "FILTER BEFORE RETRIEVAL"? I know what I want, and it isn't 2000+ tables and 5000+indexes, et al.

    I JUST upgraded to 13.4.5.6953 in hopes of some speed improvement
    - all hopes were dashed when it ground on for the usual 5 mins.

    need to eliminate the 4… more

    11 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

11. Preview XML Datatype

    Can you plead add feature to view/compare XML datatype. Current Viewer is not good enough to compare XML data

    10 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

12. Option to untick all columns when excluding\including columns

    There needs to be an option to untick all columns as running a comparison of a couple of columns over a table containing 80+ columns involves laboriously unticking 70+ columns.

    9 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

13. Ignore Calculated fields

    When a database has calculated fields, SQL Data Compare seems to process them and it takes a long time. Since these fields are calculated, they will never be updated so these should be ignored. At this time, we have to un-select each calculated field to improve on performance.

    9 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

14. If a table does not have the primary key, give us an option to use all columns on one click

    When some tables cannot be compared because they do not have the primary key, give us an option to "use the combination of all columns" for all those tables, with a single click.

    Even when there are duplicates, give us an option to "ignore duplicates if all others are identical".

    9 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

15. Enable comparison of columns encrypted with Always Encrypt

    Currently if you try compare tables with encrypted columns, you get a cast error. It doesn't tell you that encryption is not supported. In fact it took your help desk two weeks to tell me it doesn't and suggest I post a feature request here. I do not know what mechanism you use to connect to SQL Server, but all of my other SQL Server clients support it seamlessly. That includes ODBC. Even if you didn't want to enable decrypting the data you at least could just allow the comparison on the encrypted values, and let the user worry about whether or not the keys are the same. This is a major feature of SQL Server that has been around for several years. It is quickly becoming the standard to encrypt data. On top of this, your documentation implies that it works on encrypted data. So much so, that your own tech support thinks it does.

    Currently if you try compare tables with encrypted columns, you get a cast error. It doesn't tell you that encryption is not supported. In fact it took your help desk two weeks to tell me it doesn't and suggest I post a feature request here. I do not know what mechanism you use to connect to SQL Server, but all of my other SQL Server clients support it seamlessly. That includes ODBC. Even if you didn't want to enable decrypting the data you at least could just allow the comparison on the encrypted values, and let the user worry about… more

    8 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

16. Enable Transaction Isolation Option like in SQL Compare

    Enable Transaction Isolation Option like in SQL Compare. In SQL Compare you can set the transaction level to one of five options. This is needed in SQL Data Compare to eliminate blocking.

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

17. Provide explicit table and schema exclusion

    This improvement is similar to https://redgate.uservoice.com/forums/147879-sql-data-compare/suggestions/4157645-exclude-special-schema-from-datacompare, but I would like to sketch the idea out a little further.

    SQL Data Compare should provide a filtering option that allows the user to exclude entire schemas from comparison, or to exclude tables explicitly. This can be done somewhat at the schema level by unmapping an Owner.

    But this doesn't provide the feedback on the main screen that I would like to see. There should be an additional Type on the main screen named "Deselected for comparison". Tables or schemas that are not mapped shouldn't be put into the "could not be compared" category. They may be able to be compared, but the user has explicitly selected not to.

    This improvement is similar to https://redgate.uservoice.com/forums/147879-sql-data-compare/suggestions/4157645-exclude-special-schema-from-datacompare, but I would like to sketch the idea out a little further.

    SQL Data Compare should provide a filtering option that allows the user to exclude entire schemas from comparison, or to exclude tables explicitly. This can be done somewhat at the schema level by unmapping an Owner.

    But this doesn't provide the feedback on the main screen that I would like to see. There should be an additional Type on the main screen named "Deselected for comparison". Tables or schemas that are not mapped shouldn't be put into the "could not be… more

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

18. Please don't cover the header with update notices

    When updates are available, you cover part of the header. Please do not cover this information. (screen shot available upon request)

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

19. Maintain table mappings when switching comparison types

    If you have a project with a bunch of table and view mappings configured, you can easily switch between (similar) databases and retain those mappings. However, if you switch from the database type to the scripts type, even if the schema is basically identical, any mappings with filters get unchecked, but the rest remain selected. RedGate silently makes this change, and it should be considered a bug. Let me choose which action to take. If you try to re-enable those mappings, the filters are only applied to one side of the comparison, which is also an issue.

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

20. Have an application or project option that will allow you to turn off automatically checking differences

    Have a SQL DATA Compare application or project option that will allow you to turn off automatically checking differences. In Sql Compare this seems to work a little better in that only a few or no items are automatically selected when comparison results are displayed. Right now, all differences are selected in SQL Data Compare.

    6 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close