SQL Source Control

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

If you have any questions, need help or have found a bug in SQL Source Control, please review our support information http://redgatesupport.red-gate.com/home.

To get new features, performance improvements and bug fixes as soon as they’re available, you may want to turn on frequent updates: http://www.red-gate.com/products/sql-development/sql-source-control/frequent-updates

SQL Source Control

Categories

JUMP TO ANOTHER FORUM

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback
  1. One of the things that we have in all of tables is a "DateCreated" and "ModifiedBy". DateCreated is supposed to be the UTC time of the creation of the record. For Metadata supported by SQL Source Compare -- this is becoming the date the script was written, rather than the date the production goes live. We would like to state that the actual column should be replaced by GETDateUTC(), rather than the time the record was first created in development, and then we want to tell SQL Source Control to ignore the underlying column for comparison.

    We want to be…

    9 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  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  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. We have the same issue as noted here: http://www.red-gate.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?t=13662&highlight=foriegn+foreign+key

    The FK is recreated with NOCHECK during data sync which triggers a schema change.

    104 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  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. I would like the ability to source control a subset of a table (perhaps using a view).

    I have inherited a database where lookup data is intermixed with user defined data. We reference the lookup data in the table using a code (VARCHAR) that is unique when another field is NULL, so it is possible to ensure that records are created/updated/deleted without concern for the primary key involved.

    For more information, you can refer to this forum post:
    http://www.red-gate.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?p=50087

    636 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    30 comments  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    under review  ·  Kendra responded

    Hi everyone. I have merged some User Voice items on this topic of “filtered” static data, as there was significant overlap. I want to share our current guidance on handling scenarios where you need to version a subset of the columns and/or rows in the table.

    With SQL Source control, the best option at this point is to use a post-deployment script for this purpose.

    SQL Source Control introduced pre- and post- scripts in v6.3.

    A post-deployment script gives you a good amount of flexibility over exactly which rows or columns of data you want to include in your project. Example post-deployment scripts for static data are here: https://documentation.red-gate.com/soc7/common-tasks/working-with-pre-post-deployment-scripts/static-data

    If you make heavy use of Static Data, we have stronger support for this in SQL Change Automation.

    SQL Change Automation:

    • Supports column filtered static data tables in the SCA plugin in SSMS
    • Supports multiple post-deployment scripts, in case there is…
  4. Currently, SQL Data files contain a bunch of insert statements, but the order of the insert statements can be inconsistent. For example, new records might get inserted on the top or the bottom. Also, multiple SET IDENTITYINSERT statements sometimes get created. This makes it difficuly to merge data changes between multiple branches in TFS Source Control. If the Insert statements had a consistent order and only included one SET IDENTITYINSERT diffs and merges would be easier.

    524 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    36 comments  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    under review  ·  Kendra responded

    Thanks for this suggestion and for the many comments and upvotes. I realize that this is a pain point.

    I have a few shorter-term workarounds to summarize as well as some information on the longer roadmap in this update. I know these shorter-term workarounds aren’t perfect (I summarize the pros and cons), but I’m posting them as they may help a few folks.

    Workaround 1) When data changes to static data need to be made, use a “relink the table” pattern
    One can “cleanly rescript” a static data table in SQL Source Control by:

    • Unlinking the static data table
    • Committing
    • Relinking the static data table
    • Committing

    Pro: This works with the GUI and requires no special knowledge or comfort with TSQL. This may help folks with just a few static data tables.
    Con: This requires extra steps and results in extra commits in the history, which I realize can…

  5. We use Linked-Servers to connect to Oracle databases. These objects can be added by a developer and then need to be versioned like any other SQL object.

    7 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  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. don't have to perform a count, just a quick look at sysindexes would be sufficient.

    3 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  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  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. I have my database linked to source control, and if I make a change to a schema, it shows a blue dot in the Object Explorer to indicate there are pending changes. However the same does not apply to static data – if I change some data in a table that is setup for static data source control, there is no icon to indicate there are changes to be committed. The data change does appear when I go to the commit changes tab however.

    15 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  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. I just did a data edit (inserted one row) but in the differences I see three rows inserted and two removed. Two of the rows inserted are letter for letter identical to the two rows removed.

    Doesn't really matter, just a little confusing to read

    13 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. I can undo any DDL operation but I don't have the option to undo a data change in a source controlled table. I think data changes should also be in the list of changes I can undo.

    200 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    8 comments  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Kendra responded

    While SQL Source Control does not currently provide a simple way to right click and ‘Undo’ static data changes on the ‘Commit’ screen as suggested, there is a workaround which may help some users.

    If you wish to revert the static data in the table to a previous version which you have committed, you can do this by viewing the history of commits for the object in SQL Source Control, and then launching SQL Data Compare to update the database.

    Please note that this workaround requires a license for Data Compare. More detail on how to do this are here: https://documentation.red-gate.com/soc/common-tasks/update-to-a-revision-from-source-control

  10. Our application is highly metadata driven thus we must treat our static data like source code. Specifically we need accept deleteions that are made locally, apply insertions made globally, and identify the differences. Currently Sql Source Control does NOT differentiate between rows missing from the local database because either 1) the local developer deleted them or 2) they were added by a global developer to the latest source code controlled version. In case 1, we want to drive that deleteion back into the latest source code controlled version. In case 2, we want to drive that insertion into the local…

    13 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Static Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
1 3 Next →
  • Don't see your idea?