38 results found

1. Ignore SQL script files that fail to parse

   Add an option to ignore SQL files that fail to parse when the target is a Scripts Folder.

   I would like this, such that the tool can do autonomous exports without it crashing if the target contains valid but unsupported SQL like
   "DROP VIEW viewname
   CREATE OR REPLACE viewname"

   1 vote

   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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Option ILM POLICY

   Help, please, I compare tables but do not see ILM POLICY.
   The ILM POLICY option is enabled.

   Script:
   CREATE TABLE salesado
   (PRODID NUMBER NOT NULL,
   CUSTID NUMBER NOT NULL,
   TIMEID DATE NOT NULL,
   CHANNELID NUMBER NOT NULL,
   PROMOID NUMBER NOT NULL,
   QUANTITYSOLD NUMBER(10,2) NOT NULL,
   AMOUNTSOLD NUMBER(10,2) NOT NULL)
   PARTITION BY RANGE (timeid)
   ( PARTITION salesq12012 VALUES LESS THAN (TODATE('01-APR-2012','dd-MON-yyyy')),
   PARTITION salesq22012 VALUES LESS THAN (TODATE('01-JUL-2012','dd-MON-yyyy')),
   PARTITION salesq32012 VALUES LESS THAN (TODATE('01-OCT-2012','dd-MON-yyyy')),
   PARTITION salesq42012 VALUES LESS THAN (TO_DATE('01-JAN-2013','dd-MON-yyyy'))
   );

   ALTER TABLE salesado MODIFY PARTITION salesq1_2012
   ILM ADD POLICY ROW STORE COMPRESS ADVANCED ROW
   AFTER 30 DAYS OF NO MODIFICATION;
   COMMIT;

   ALTER TABLE salesado MODIFY PARTITION salesq2_2012
   ILM ADD POLICY ROW STORE COMPRESS ADVANCED SEGMENT
   AFTER 3 MONTHS OF NO MODIFICATION;
   COMMIT;

   ALTER TABLE salesado MODIFY PARTITION salesq3_2012
   ILM ADD POLICY ROW STORE COMPRESS ADVANCED GROUP
   AFTER 6 MONTHS OF NO MODIFICATION;
   COMMIT;

   Help, please, I compare tables but do not see ILM POLICY.
   The ILM POLICY option is enabled.

   Script:
   CREATE TABLE salesado
   (PRODID NUMBER NOT NULL,
   CUSTID NUMBER NOT NULL,
   TIMEID DATE NOT NULL,
   CHANNELID NUMBER NOT NULL,
   PROMOID NUMBER NOT NULL,
   QUANTITYSOLD NUMBER(10,2) NOT NULL,
   AMOUNTSOLD NUMBER(10,2) NOT NULL)
   PARTITION BY RANGE (timeid)
   ( PARTITION salesq12012 VALUES LESS THAN (TODATE('01-APR-2012','dd-MON-yyyy')),
   PARTITION salesq22012 VALUES LESS THAN (TODATE('01-JUL-2012','dd-MON-yyyy')),
   PARTITION salesq32012 VALUES LESS THAN (TODATE('01-OCT-2012','dd-MON-yyyy')),
   PARTITION salesq42012 VALUES LESS THAN (TO_DATE('01-JAN-2013','dd-MON-yyyy'))
   );

   ALTER… more

   •  

   1 vote

   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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. more features to add in interactive report html

   Hi, i have a question about interactive html report file. Maybe it is possible to add buttons in it like in schema compare for jumping between changes, because now its not really comfortable to navigate, when you have to scroll and find one change on big file. And finally you find that there is the difference only on space or tab. Also maybe it is possible to have alignment of code not on left side, but like in database - that spaces, tabs wouldn't be removed.

   Here is the link where i got answered to this question. But he just said to register this question here:

   https://forum.red-gate.com/discussion/comment/168797#Comment_168797

   Hi, i have a question about interactive html report file. Maybe it is possible to add buttons in it like in schema compare for jumping between changes, because now its not really comfortable to navigate, when you have to scroll and find one change on big file. And finally you find that there is the difference only on space or tab. Also maybe it is possible to have alignment of code not on left side, but like in database - that spaces, tabs wouldn't be removed.

   Here is the link where i got answered to this question. But he just… more

   1 vote

   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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Add support for ANALYTIC VIEWS objects

   Currently the Schema compare for ORACLE doesnt support the below objects.
   1. ATTRIBUTE DIMENSION
   2. HIERARCHY
   3. ANALYTIC VIEW

   These have been available since Oracle12c. It would be nice for redgate to support all the Oracle object types from the latest database versions.

   1 vote

   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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Comparison Options: Add a Ignore option for Sequence Increment By

   Sometimes in non-PROD environmens vs prod we may want to have different increment by clauses on sequences.

   e.g. increment by 3 on non-Prod but increment by 1 on Prod

   Would be be nice to be able to ignore differences in the increment by clause as an ignore options (similar to the ignore option for sequence current value)

   3 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Grants are not detected correctly when logged in as proxy user.

   Please support proxy users. They allow people to impersonate another user which is useful for all kinds of purposes regarding security and auditing.
   So, I got this user called MyUserName which can act as a proxy user for OurSchema. To log in, I use MyUserName[OurSchema] as the username (and my own password). Then I can make modifications to OurSchema and basically work as if I'm logged in as OurSchema.
   This works well in any tool. In Schema Compare it almost works, but there seems to be an issue with the grants. The grants are not detected, so when I run SC with a proxy user, I suddenly get about 3000 differences.

   Please support proxy users. They allow people to impersonate another user which is useful for all kinds of purposes regarding security and auditing.
   So, I got this user called MyUserName which can act as a proxy user for OurSchema. To log in, I use MyUserName[OurSchema] as the username (and my own password). Then I can make modifications to OurSchema and basically work as if I'm logged in as OurSchema.
   This works well in any tool. In Schema Compare it almost works, but there seems to be an issue with the grants. The grants are not detected, so when I run… more

   1 vote

   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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Support object tables

   CREATE TABE FOO of BAR

   If I create a table (FOO) of an object type (BAR), this table is not picked up by schema compare. This is probably because it's not listed in USERTABLES, but in USEROBJECT_TABLES.

   1 vote

   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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Synonym Handling w/ "Exclude Schema Names" option Enabled

   With the “Exclude Schema Names” option enabled, SCO identifies false-positive mismatches for public synonyms.

   In Oracle public synonym DDL w/o owner specified defaults the object owner to current user.

   CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM foo_bar FOR bar
   /

   SELECT *
   FROM allsynonyms
   WHERE synonymname = 'FOO_BAR'
   /

   SCO happily generates the Public synonym DDL w/o the owner specified (and it can be executed as such). However, on subsequent comparisons the underlying object’s qualified name is used and the public synonyms are all identified as being different.
   e.g. CREATE OR REPLACE PUBLIC SYNONYM foobar FOR myschema.bar vs. CREATE OR REPLACE PUBLIC SYNONYM foo_bar FOR bar

   This behavior feels like a bug.

   Suggesting a fix:

   Option 1
   - Ignore the current schema owner value (source / target side) if the “Exclude Schema Names” option is selected and the target has no (or a different) owner on the target-side DDL
   (This option seems more straightforward, but the implicit ambiguity could be considered a bit risky – esp. since the SCO generated public synonym DDL uses CREATE OR REPLACE PUBLIC SYNONYM)

   Option 2
   - One could also make the argument that public synonyms are a bit of a special case – because they are PUBLIC / DB instance wide.
   Perhaps the default behavior ought to be for developers to be specific about the public synonym object ownership. Taking this approach, it may make sense to have a special configuration setting specific to excluding the schema name for the public synonym underlying object ownership (i.e. this would support moving objects cross schema while maintaining the public synonym – e.g. myschemav1 to myschemav2).

   Additional considerations for either solution:
   - Synonyms (public or private) are a bit of a special case because you can declare synonyms for another user’s objects.
   - Public synonyms are even more of a special case because there is a single instance of the synonym name which is owned by PUBLIC – i.e. there is only one source of truth for the PUBLIC synonym at any point in time.
   - SCO's use of the "OR REPLACE" caluse for PUBLIC (global) synonyms is potentially problematic as this can result in an unintentional repointing of the object a synonym points to (or evrn pointing a public synonym to a non-existant object) -- w/o warning!
   -- Omitting the "OR REPLACE" clause would result in an error if the PUBLIC synonym already existed
   - Also consider the deployment models:
   -- Running deployments as SYSTEM (or an execution / super-user account w/ multi-schema – CREATE ANY * - privs)
   --- in this case you will most certainly want / need to specify a qualified schema owner for nearly every type of object including synonyms (public or private).
   -- Running deployments where the user doing the deployment is the object owner (i.e. not using SYSTEM or a multi-schema privileged user)
   --- in this case the need to explicitly identify the object owner is somewhat lessend (assuming current user / deployer owne the object referenced by the synonym), but only somewhat as a synonym can be declared for another schema's objects

   Here are some examples:

   If deployment user is:
   - “SCHEMA1”
   -- CREATE OR REPLACE PUBLIC SYNONYM foobar FOR bar (is FOR SCHEMA1.bar - not SYSTEM.bar)
   - “SCHEMA2”
   -- CREATE OR REPLACE PUBLIC SYNONYM foobar FOR bar (is FOR SCHEMA2.bar - not SYSTEM.bar)

   • “SCHEMA1”
     -- CREATE OR REPLACE PUBLIC SYNONYM foobar FOR SCHEMA_2.bar (schema owner is qualified; this is allowed – as I can create a public synonym for another user’s objects)
     --- HOWEVER -- this is where the addition of the OR REPLACE clause is actually a bit dangerous, because I can effectively “hi-jack” / repoint a public synonym w/o warning
     --- Using only the CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM… I’d get an error alerting me that the name was already in use and I’d need to resolve that conflict before continuing
     -- May be a good idea to force an explicit drop and re-create – or at least make the inclusion of “ OR REPLACE” clause and optional behavior for the public synonyms?

   • “SYSTEM” (or multi-schema privileged user)
     -- CREATE OR REPLACE PUBLIC SYNONYM foobar FOR <schemaowner>.bar (will most certainly require a schema owner name, as it is not a good practice to set-up your objects under the SYSTEM user. Likewise you wouldn’t want your deployment user account to be the designated object owner of any unqualified object names the public synonyms point to)
     (In this case there is even a greater risk of unqualified object names resulting in a public synonym that points to a non-existant objects -- e.g. SYSTEM.bar)

   In Summary:
   - Probably best practice to encourage the use of qualified object names for synonyms (public or private)
   - May want to option toggle the use of the OR REPLACE clause for public synonyms
   -- safest to default to forcing a drop / recreate of a public synonym if the name is already in use
   -- some use cases may want to leverage the OR REPLACE clause (see next item), but that may be more of be a special use case (i.e. an override of default behavior)
   - There may be some use cases where users intentionally want to omit the schema name of the underlying object, to facilitate re-pointing the underlying object a public synonym resolves to

   With the “Exclude Schema Names” option enabled, SCO identifies false-positive mismatches for public synonyms.

   In Oracle public synonym DDL w/o owner specified defaults the object owner to current user.

   CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM foo_bar FOR bar
   /

   SELECT *
   FROM allsynonyms
   WHERE synonymname = 'FOO_BAR'
   /

   SCO happily generates the Public synonym DDL w/o the owner specified (and it can be executed as such). However, on subsequent comparisons the underlying object’s qualified name is used and the public synonyms are all identified as being different.
   e.g. CREATE OR REPLACE PUBLIC SYNONYM foobar FOR myschema.bar vs. CREATE OR… more

   1 vote

   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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Synonym Ignore bug

   When entering ignore mask into PublicSynonym section, the ignore does not work - all public synonyms are still compared. But if the same ignore mask is entered into Synonym section, public synonyms are affected.

   1 vote

   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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. wildcard

    Please add advanced filtering in Schema Compare. E.g. wildcard or regex matches to only show objects matching a certain criteria.

    3 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Exclude system-generated interval partitions from comparison and DDL

    For background on Oracle's interval partitioning feature, see chapter 4 of Oracle Database Concept for release 12.2.

    Our practice is to create interval-partitioned tables with the minimum number of partitions necessary to create the table (usually just one partition), and let Oracle create all others as data arrives requiring them. Between test, QA, and production databases, data arrives at different times, giving rise to automatic creation of different partitions. But because these differences are only a side-effect of different contents, they are not relevant, in the same way that differences in system-generated constraint names are not relevant. Changing the partition key or the interval size would require a rebuild.

    Any time there is a CREATE TABLE command for an interval-partitioned table, the command should be limited to only those partitions that are needed to establish the table. In other words, exclude those partitions where DBATABPARTITIONS.INTERVAL='YES', because they are system-generated. The CREATE TABLE command should explicitly list only those partitions where INTERVAL='NO';

    An an example, I have an interval-partitioned table named FMEMBERTENUREMMSNAPSHOT. These are the partitions in my test database:
    C911233@TCRDS_SACRDSD2R.ssdc.kp.org> l
    1 select partitionname, partitionposition, highvalue, interval
    2 from dbatabpartitions
    3 where tablename='FMEMBERTENUREMMSNAPSHOT'
    4 and tableowner='COBIDM'
    5* order by partitionposition
    C911233@TCRDSSACRDSD2R.ssdc.kp.org> /

    PARTITIONNAME PARTITIONPOSITION HIGH_VALUE INTERVAL

    ---

    PARTEMPTY 1 190001 NO
    SYSP937 2 201310 YES
    SYSP968 3 201311 YES
    SYSP966 4 201312 YES
    SYSP973 5 201313 YES
    SYSP933 6 201402 YES
    SYSP970 7 201403 YES
    SYSP967 8 201404 YES
    SYSP931 9 201405 YES
    SYSP932 10 201406 YES
    SYSP935 11 201407 YES
    SYSP977 12 201408 YES
    <skipping many lines for brevity>
    SYSP3318 63 201811 YES
    SYSP3554 64 201812 YES

    If there is a need to generate a CREATE TABLE command, all I really need is shown below, because it is sufficient to establish the table as indicated by INTERVAL='NO' in the query above:

    CREATE TABLE cobidm.rgtemp11090455980 (
    fmbrtenuremmsnpshtik NUMBER NOT NULL,
    dmbrprmyhrnik NUMBER NOT NULL,
    <many columns omitted>
    crdsprcscntlupdid NUMBER NOT NULL,
    CONSTRAINT RGTEMP11090455981 PRIMARY KEY (fmbrtenuremmsnpshtik) USING INDEX (CREATE UNIQUE INDEX cobidm.rgtemp11090455982 ON cobidm.rgtemp11090455980(fmbrtenuremmsnpshtik)
    NOCOMPRESS
    TABLESPACE cobimediumindex),
    CONSTRAINT RGTEMP11090455983 UNIQUE (srcmbrprmyhrnid,srcsnpshtmmnb) USING INDEX (CREATE UNIQUE INDEX cobidm.rgtemp11090455984 ON cobidm.rgtemp11090455980(srcmbrprmyhrnid,srcsnpshtmmnb)
    NOCOMPRESS
    TABLESPACE cobimediumindex)
    ) TABLESPACE cobihcc
    PARTITION BY RANGE (dsnpshtmmik) INTERVAL (1)
    (PARTITION partempty VALUES LESS THAN (190001)
    INDEXING ON
    TABLESPACE cobi_hcc COLUMN STORE COMPRESS FOR QUERY LOW)
    PARALLEL 4;
    ;

    What I am getting today is shown below. This has the effect of forcing the creation of all of these partitions whether I have data that needs them or not, which therefore does not follow my model definition. I have to edit the script to remove the unnecessary partitions.

    --

    -- Script generated by Schema Compare for Oracle 4.0.10.528 on 16/11/2018 07:34:27

    SET DEFINE OFF
    SET SQLBLANKLINES ON

    CREATE TABLE cobidm.rgtemp11090455980 (
    fmbrtenuremmsnpshtik NUMBER NOT NULL,
    dmbrprmyhrnik NUMBER NOT NULL,
    <skipping columns for bevity>
    crdsprcscntlupdid NUMBER NOT NULL,
    CONSTRAINT RGTEMP11090455981 PRIMARY KEY (fmbrtenuremmsnpshtik) USING INDEX (CREATE UNIQUE INDEX cobidm.rgtemp11090455982 ON cobidm.rgtemp11090455980(fmbrtenuremmsnpshtik)
    NOCOMPRESS
    TABLESPACE cobimediumindex),
    CONSTRAINT RGTEMP11090455983 UNIQUE (srcmbrprmyhrnid,srcsnpshtmmnb) USING INDEX (CREATE UNIQUE INDEX cobidm.rgtemp11090455984 ON cobidm.rgtemp11090455980(srcmbrprmyhrnid,srcsnpshtmmnb)
    NOCOMPRESS
    TABLESPACE cobimediumindex)
    ) TABLESPACE cobihcc
    PARTITION BY RANGE (dsnpshtmmik) INTERVAL (1)
    (PARTITION partempty VALUES LESS THAN (190001)
    INDEXING ON
    TABLESPACE cobihcc COLUMN STORE COMPRESS FOR QUERY LOW,
    PARTITION VALUES LESS THAN (201310)
    INDEXING ON
    TABLESPACE cobimediumdata NOCOMPRESS,
    PARTITION VALUES LESS THAN (201311)
    INDEXING ON
    TABLESPACE cobimediumdata NOCOMPRESS,
    PARTITION VALUES LESS THAN (201312)
    INDEXING ON
    TABLESPACE cobimedium_data NOCOMPRESS,

    <skipping many lines for brevity>

    PARTITION VALUES LESS THAN (201811)
    INDEXING ON
    TABLESPACE cobimediumdata NOCOMPRESS,
    PARTITION VALUES LESS THAN (201812)
    INDEXING ON
    TABLESPACE cobimediumdata NOCOMPRESS)
    PARALLEL 4;

    For background on Oracle's interval partitioning feature, see chapter 4 of Oracle Database Concept for release 12.2.

    Our practice is to create interval-partitioned tables with the minimum number of partitions necessary to create the table (usually just one partition), and let Oracle create all others as data arrives requiring them. Between test, QA, and production databases, data arrives at different times, giving rise to automatic creation of different partitions. But because these differences are only a side-effect of different contents, they are not relevant, in the same way that differences in system-generated constraint names are not relevant. Changing the partition… more

    4 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  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. separate type spec and type body

    Please separate type specifications and type bodies. (e.g. "CREATE TYPE FOO AS OBJECT" and "CREATE OR REPLACE TYPE BODY FOO"). Most of the time our changes are only to the body but Schema Compare will try to recreate the spec on deployment even if the spec has not changed.

    This will fail if it has dependencies and make automated builds fail when using the Deployment Suite for Oracle with a build system.

    4 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  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. Sorting Database Objects in Sync script

    When we create a syncronization script we have diffrent order of objects from time to time. It is not very good for us, because it is hard to find out changes.
    Could you please make that the order does not change (for example in alphabetical order).

    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…)
    2 comments  ·  Schema Compare  ·  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. portable installation

    Oracle schema compare should install also in a portable way.

    4 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  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. More control over file naming of source-controlled script files.

    It would be good if generating source control files where would be control how files are named.
    Data Compare does not allow joining related objects (like table with alias and indexes), so allowing to change alias name filenames and index filenames patterns would be nice (like prefix+tablename+fieldname for index)

    5 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  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. Concurrent user licensing

    Add concurrent licensing system to the product so you can use it on Citrix Xenapp.

    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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  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. Constraints against other schemas

    Include constraints that's against other schemas

    4 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  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. Schema Compare Report - interactive html-report - minor bug causes images not to show in Firefox via http-server

    When you put a and interactive-html-report and its images folder underneath htdoc of an http-server, the images fail to show in Firefox while working fine in Internet-Explorer. This can be fixed easily by changing function SetupImagesDir() :
    instead of the currently generated backslash:
    imagesdir = reportFileName + "images\";
    use forward slash:
    imagesdir = reportFileName + "images\/";

    In my tests this works in both IE and FF both via direct file and http-server.

    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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  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
    under review  ·  AdminDavid Atkinson (Product Manager, Redgate) responded

    We are hoping to soon update the report entirely to be more consistent with the report generated by SQL Compare, the SQL Server sister tool. Please let us know if you have any other suggestions on what the report should show.

19. Schema Compare Report -silly to have separate images folder for each interactive html report

    When using the interactive html report currently a new folder for each new report is generated containing the exact same images. There should just be a general images folder by all reports. Alternatively there should also be an option to use images from redgate website remotely. This would make it easier to send out differences reports as e-mail.

    3 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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. Schema Compare Report - identical objects should be filtered too

    When generating a schema compare report there is the option to "Also include identical objects". When you choose that you get again ALL object types of identical objects. I want to be able to include only the identical objects of the filtered object type, which is possible for differing objects via choosing "Objects selected for deploment". I think objects excluded by filter should also be excluded in the report, no matter what.

    3 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  ·  Schema Compare  ·  Edit…  ·  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