- or
No existing idea results
- ~ No ideas found ~
110 results found
-
Allow sorting column by differences first
It would be useful to sort a column so that differences appear first (or last). This could be done through a right click on the column headers and selecting the type of sort to perform.
When comparing dataset with a large number of different rows (in my case 150k) where one column may having only 1 row that's different its next to impossible to find that row. Using the mouse to drag the scroller skips too much to be useful and paging down takes FOREVER.
4 votes -
Read from SQL Native Compressed Backups
Compare does not read from SQL backups that have used the native compression, although they can read from Redgate Backup files that have been compressed. I think that it should also be able to read from SQL compressed backups, as not all users will have Redgate Backup software.
This would be beneficial to all, because it would create a way of restoring lost data without using a partial restore, to any user that has this Compare software.49 votes -
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…14 votes -
Connection Coloring
Would like to be able to assign a color to server/database combinations so that I can easily see what database will be updated. For example, my PROD database would always be colored red and it would help from pushing changes to the wrong database.
3 votes -
Allow ordering for Delete, Update, Insert statements to be in different order
Often times updating a column on a table is dependent on a new record being inserted. I would prefer to be able to define the order for these to run in.
1 vote -
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 -
Setting Comparison Key and check box selection feature
using the SQL Data Compare version 10 and Version 14.1 ( by the way I saw the same issue in version 13.)
For tables where the user has to set the Comparison Keys
In version 10 when the Comparison Key is SET and it changes to Custom , the check both between the two databases been compared is selected automatically. This is not the case in version 14.11 vote -
Add possibility to add CHANGE_TRACKING_CONTEXT to deployment script
Provide an option (in gui and command line) to add a CHANGETRACKINGCONTEXT to the generated deployment script.
This is helpful when using sql change tracking for synchronization to manage whether the changed made under a provided CHANGETRACKINGCONTEXT need to be synchronized or not.
When enabling change tracking we have to make sure that the data in the tables are identical on both sides. Thats were we use SQL Data Compare, but the changes made for that "initial sync" shouldn't be recognized by change tracking for later synchronization.
This would be very easy if you could just add an option to generate that context to the statements in the deployment script like this:
DECLARE @contextString NVARCHAR(100) = 'SomeStringAsInput';
DECLARE @context VARBINARY(128);
SET @context = CAST(@contextString AS VARBINARY(128));
WITH CHANGETRACKINGCONTEXT (@context)
INSERT INTO dbo.Table (TableName, Text)
VALUES
(
'TableName'
'Test'
)Provide an option (in gui and command line) to add a CHANGETRACKINGCONTEXT to the generated deployment script.
This is helpful when using sql change tracking for synchronization to manage whether the changed made under a provided CHANGETRACKINGCONTEXT need to be synchronized or not.
When enabling change tracking we have to make sure that the data in the tables are identical on both sides. Thats were we use SQL Data Compare, but the changes made for that "initial sync" shouldn't be recognized by change tracking for later synchronization.
This would be very easy if you could just…
3 votes -
deployment script for single change
Provide an right -click option to generate the deployment change for a row (or possibly multiple rows) from the difference panel. Similar to the Show Object Deployment Script option in the summary panel.
1 vote -
Be more robust in the face of Transport Errors
Data Compare almost always fails because of frequent (but short) network outages. If we could specify the timeout, this problem would be solved.
3 votes -
Ability to send bugreport from unlicensed trial
I've got some bugs during trial and I would like to send bug reports to support, but only licensed users can do it...
1 vote -
Ability to send bugreport from unlicensed trial
I've got some bugs during trial and I would like to send bug reports to support, but only licensed users can do it...
0 votes -
validate where clauses
I have written were clauses for about 100 tables for data sync. while I do not want to sync just yet I do want to make sure I have no typos in the where clauses. Please add some option to run a "select top 1 where ..." from each table marked for comparison so I can fast check for where clause errors (currently I have to wait for each table to completely compare and if I have typos in the where clause of table 98 it will take me long time to find this out)
4 votes -
Ability to Deploy Changes to Individual Columns
After reviewing the result of table(s) comparison, it should be easier to choose by clicking a box by the column header for which column(s) you want to sync across to the target DB.
3 votes -
Where clause gone when multiple tables selected
Earlier versions would maintain the Where Clause when it was the same for multiple selected tables. We have a project that never changes other than one part of the where clause but I have to re-enter the same where clause every time. It's only saved per individual row.
1 vote -
Add ability to migrate CDC tables from one database to another
When we upgrade an application, say by adding tables, we use frequently use SQL Data Compare to move the data from the old database to the new, upgraded database. It would be great to be able to migrate the CDC data for the tables in the original version of the database to the new version!
3 votes -
provide an option to halt the compare after 'n' mismatches to allow quicker results when expecting a perfect match
when expecting a perfect match, please provide an option to halt the compare after a user-provided number of mismatches.
3 votes -
option to exclude tsqlt tables and schemas
SQL Compare can exclude tSQLt-related objects. SQL Data Compare should have a similar facility, at least for parity with SQL Compare and also to reduce false positives in the result
3 votes -
My notebook was stolen and I can't deactivate my existing licence
My notebook was stolen and I can't deactivate my existing licence. Please help!
1 vote -
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…
11 votes
- Don't see your idea?