588 results found

1. SQL Source Control - Subversion - Switching

   We branch our database often for requirements and version releases. Each version gets a tag which makes it easy to link to the proper version. When bugs come in we need to validate them. One of the steps that needs to happen is we need to make sure our database is on the same version that the bug came in for. The easiest way to do this would be to perform a subversion switch command to the tag in our repository for that version of database. It is very difficult to do this with SQL Source Control as it stands now. The only real way to do this is to unlink the database and then relink to the proper tag. In the background there is alot of deleting of folders and bandwidth to pull down the source again. With a switch it will only require the bandwidth for the changes not for everything.

   We branch our database often for requirements and version releases. Each version gets a tag which makes it easy to link to the proper version. When bugs come in we need to validate them. One of the steps that needs to happen is we need to make sure our database is on the same version that the bug came in for. The easiest way to do this would be to perform a subversion switch command to the tag in our repository for that version of database. It is very difficult to do this with SQL Source Control as it stands… 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…)
   4 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

2. Why check and re-check for changes so many times?

   Using SSC 3.0.11.3531
   Dedicated development model

   1. We finally get a nice little notification that Commit Tab has been updated. (Kudos for finally doing something in the background and letting users know they have to take action on something)
   2. Click on the notification to open the Commit Tab
   3. Wait for SSC to determine latest version and work out whats changed.
   4. Select my items and say commit
   5. Wait for SSC to once again determine the latest version and work out whats changed and commit my selected changes to TFS.

   Surely
   a) You already know what items are changed in order to show notification, so you shouldn't need to do it again.
   and b) at least once I've selected the changes to commit, you don't need to once more determine whats changed again?

   My poor little disk in my desktop machine is being thrashed to death.

   Cheers
   Phil

   Using SSC 3.0.11.3531
   Dedicated development model

   1. We finally get a nice little notification that Commit Tab has been updated. (Kudos for finally doing something in the background and letting users know they have to take action on something)
   2. Click on the notification to open the Commit Tab
   3. Wait for SSC to determine latest version and work out whats changed.
   4. Select my items and say commit
   5. Wait for SSC to once again determine the latest version and work out whats changed and commit my selected changes to TFS.

   Surely
   a) You already know what items are changed in order to show… 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…)
   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. Support for SourceGear Veracity
   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…)
   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. distinguish between unique and non-unique indexes

   (This is actually relevant to both SQL Compare and SQL Source Control.)

   We really need to be able to distinguish between unique and non-unique indexes when comparing, checking in, and deploying database schema changes. ("Unique indexes" include primary keys, unique constraints, and unique indexes on tables and unique indexes on views; "non-unique indexes" include non-unique indexes on tables and views.)

   Unique indexes are essential to the database development process. They make a significant functional difference to the behavior of the database: they enforce business rules and referential integrity; they limit the data that can be entered into the database; foreign keys depend on them. Developers should be responsible for creating and maintaining all of the unique indexes on the development database, and an automated deployment process that uses SQL Compare and SQL Source Control should be able to deploy all database schema changes, including unique indexes, from the development database to the production database.

   On the other hand, non-unique indexes do not affect the database's behavior; they only affect the database's performance. Developers should not be responsible for maintaining non-unique indexes; they can't. A development database usually has a relatively small amount of test data in it, and a production database usually has a much larger amount of real data. SQL Server uses different indexes and different query execution plans depending on the amount and quality of data in the database, and the servers recommend different indexes depending on which queries get used the most frequently. A developer, running queries on the development database and looking at the execution plans to determine which indexes are needed, will get results that are not valid for the production database. In our case, it is also common for one set of queries to be heavily used one month and an entirely different set of queries to be heavily used the next month, so the developers would never be able to keep up with the production server's changing needs.

   Instead, we have a SQL Agent job that runs periodically on the production server to maintain non-unique indexes. The job reads and analyzes the system view sys.dmdbindexusagestats to determine which indexes are the least-recently used and the most-frequently updated, and drops them. It also reads and analyzes the system views sys.dmdbmissingindexgroupstats, sys.dmdbmissingindexgroups, and sys.dmdbmissingindex_details to determine which missing indexes are the most needed, and creates them. This index maintenance job frees up developers to do actual development instead of tracking down performance problems and fixing them.

   The problem is that SQL Compare and SQL Source Control do not distinguish between unique indexes and non-unique indexes; it will compare and synchronize either all of them or none of them. If we ignore indexes, then we can't deploy primary keys, unique constraints, unique indexes, or foreign keys (since foreign keys depend on unique indexes); if we include indexes, then the non-unique indexes created on the production server will be dropped in favor of the non-unique indexes that happen to exist on the development server, undoing all of the performance improvements made by the automatic index maintenance job.

   We would like the "Ignore indexes" option of SQL Compare and SQL Source Control to be split into two options, "Ignore unique indexes" and "Ignore non-unique indexes".

   (This is actually relevant to both SQL Compare and SQL Source Control.)

   We really need to be able to distinguish between unique and non-unique indexes when comparing, checking in, and deploying database schema changes. ("Unique indexes" include primary keys, unique constraints, and unique indexes on tables and unique indexes on views; "non-unique indexes" include non-unique indexes on tables and views.)

   Unique indexes are essential to the database development process. They make a significant functional difference to the behavior of the database: they enforce business rules and referential integrity; they limit the data that can be entered into the database; foreign… 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…)
   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

5. In the commit window, have a search field as in SQL Compare to locate item to commit

   In the commit window, have a search field as in SQL Compare to locate item to commit

   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…)
   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

6. This app to too chatty with the database! Turning polling off is not straightfoward to do like it should be and once you start Source Contro

   Turning off polling is not a straightforward task. And after I've used Source Control I have to exit SSMS and restart it in order to not have it generate a ridiculous about of traffic to my SQL Server 2012 SP1 instance. This has to be fixed or I'll find another tool.

   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…)
   0 comments  ·  History/Log  ·  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. Use windows username instead of disaply name for linking to TFS 2012

   I am unable to link databases to TFS 2012 due to our parent company enforcing a Active Directory display name of "LastName, FirstName" which TFS claims is invalid due to the comma.

   It is a known issue with TFS (http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/768112/tfs-2012-build-failing-with-tf10158-user-name-contains-unsupported-characters)

   The workaround listed on Microsoft Connect is to use "domain\username" instead of display name when sending commands to TFS. Unfortunately, SQL Source Control doesn't expose a way to do this currently.

   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…)
   0 comments  ·  Initial Setup  ·  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. Exclude/Include filter not working as expected, SLOW performance

   we have 13000 objects in our database.
   12800 of them are all in the dbo schema which contains the standard logic for our product.
   The rest 200 are in the customer specific schema.
   We are not interested in source controlling the standard logic, since we get it from our supplier.
   We need to source control our customer specific changes. For that every change is made in another schema.
   We can perfectly filter the objects out for source control with your tool.
   (so they do not appear on the commit screen). However it is very very slow, that's why I suspected the tool not to filter the objects "server-side"

   I started a profler session and my suspicion was confirmed: the tool is getting all objects and then filters the rows "client-side".
   So first getting 13000 objects to not use 12800 of them. It is also using a lot of memory (after 2 hours we get memory exceptions).
   Could you please change this? Now I'm trying to convince the team to use those tools (I used them on smaller projects).
   But with this speed, they won't agree.
   Here the queries I catched when opening commit tab with filter on:

   SELECT so.name AS TableName,
   ss.name AS TableOwner,
   cc.name AS ConstraintName,
   cc.objectid AS Constraintid,
   cc.isnotforreplication AS NotForReplication,
   cc.isnottrusted AS WithNoCheck,
   cc.isdisabled AS Disabled,
   sc.name AS ColumnName,
   cc.parentcolumnid AS colid,
   cc.definition AS Text,
   CONVERT(bit, CASE cc.issystemnamed WHEN 1 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) As issystemnamed
   FROM sys.checkconstraints cc WITH (NOLOCK)
   INNER JOIN sys.objects so WITH (NOLOCK) ON so.objectid=cc.parentobjectid
   LEFT JOIN sys.schemas ss WITH (NOLOCK) ON ss.schemaid=so.schemaid
   LEFT JOIN sys.columns sc WITH (NOLOCK) ON sc.columnid=cc.parentcolumnid AND sc.objectid=cc.parentobjectid
   ORDER BY so.name, cc.name

   SELECT s.name AS ProcedureName,
   p.name AS ProcedureOwner,
   ss.name AS SchemaName,
   s.objectid AS id,
   CONVERT(bit, ISNULL(sm.isschemabound,0)) AS SchemaBound,
   CONVERT(bit, ISNULL(sm.usesansinulls, 0)) AS AnsiNulls,
   CONVERT(bit, ISNULL(sm.usesquotedidentifier,0)) AS QuotedIdentifier,
   s.type AS ProcedureType,
   am.assemblyclass,
   am.assemblymethod,
   CASE WHEN am.nullonnullinput IS NULL THEN sm.nullonnullinput ELSE am.nullonnullinput END AS nullonnullinput,
   COALESCE(p2.name,p3.name) AS executeas,
   CONVERT(bit, COALESCE(
   CASE WHEN am.executeasprincipalid = -2 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END,
   CASE WHEN sm.executeasprincipalid = -2 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END)) AS executeasowner,
   a.name AS assembly,
   case when sm.definition is null THEN CONVERT(bit, 1) else CONVERT(bit, 0) END AS encrypted

   FROM sys.objects s WITH (NOLOCK)
   LEFT JOIN sys.databaseprincipals p WITH (NOLOCK) ON p.principalid=s.principalid
   LEFT JOIN sys.schemas ss WITH (NOLOCK) ON ss.schemaid=s.schemaid
   LEFT JOIN sys.sqlmodules sm WITH (NOLOCK) ON sm.objectid=s.objectid
   LEFT JOIN sys.assemblymodules am WITH (NOLOCK) ON am.objectid=s.objectid
   LEFT JOIN sys.assemblies a WITH (NOLOCK) ON a.assemblyid=am.assemblyid
   LEFT JOIN sys.databaseprincipals p2 WITH (NOLOCK) ON p2.principalid=am.executeasprincipalid
   LEFT JOIN sys.databaseprincipals p3 WITH (NOLOCK) ON p3.principalid=sm.executeasprincipalid
   WHERE s.type IN (N'P', N'PC') AND
   (CAST(CASE WHEN s.ismsshipped = 1 then 1
   WHEN (SELECT majorid FROM sys.extendedproperties WHERE
   majorid = s.objectid AND minorid = 0 AND class = 1 AND
   name = N'microsoftdatabasetools_support') IS NOT NULL THEN 1
   ELSE 0
   END AS bit)=0)

   we have 13000 objects in our database.
   12800 of them are all in the dbo schema which contains the standard logic for our product.
   The rest 200 are in the customer specific schema.
   We are not interested in source controlling the standard logic, since we get it from our supplier.
   We need to source control our customer specific changes. For that every change is made in another schema.
   We can perfectly filter the objects out for source control with your tool.
   (so they do not appear on the commit screen). However it is very very slow, that's why I suspected… 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…)
   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

9. Make it obvious if there any "Get latest" items

   When the SQL Source Control tab refreshes, it would be exceedingly useful to see if there are any items under the "Get latest" tab without having to go into the tab.

   I would suggest adding the number of changes in the tab to the tab title. For example...

   _/ Commit changes (12) _/ Get latest (2) _.....

   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…)
   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. object revisions

    Perhaps this already exists, but I couldn't easily find it by searching. We are using SVN as a backend. When checking in files, the "revision" number seems to be incremental based upon a global revision number, and NOT the actual revision number of the object being checked in.

    If I'm creating a brand-new procedure and I check it in, the revision number should be 1??? Not 152 or some other number.

    This way, after many changes, of when I want to go back to a prior version, you can easily find it!

    Can this please be added?

    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  ·  History/Log  ·  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. Ability to commit all databases on a given SQL Instance at one time. No need for per-database commits.

    Too much effort involved to commit multiple databases. Need the ability to right-click at the instance-level, and initiate a check-in for all databases with affinity to a source-control provider.

    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…)
    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. Ability to recompare with source on the Setup tab

    Sometimes after committing changes to source I then want to restore a copy of a production database over the top of my dev db and test the changes by running "Get Latest". It seems that something is cached and there are no changes to get. It would be helpful to have a RECOMPARE button on the setup page that does a full compare of the current DB against source for both schema and static data. This would avoid the work around of unlinking, removing temp folder and relinking.

    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

13. Add the "solution" concept for multiple projects

    It would be nice to allow comparison "solutions" where you could have multiple projects bundled together. The solution comparison could be run in a single step, and all projects would be run with results in separate tabbed windows. For example, on a weekly basis I need to compare DEV and LIVE schemas for nine databases. I have nine separate projects that I need to open and run. If I could bundle these into a solution, run the solution and have all nine projects run and get their results displayed in tabs, that would save a ton of time.

    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…)
    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

14. From the Source Contol tab, it should be easy to tell which instance you are updating.

    Sometimes I'm connected to multiple instances and it would be nice if the Source Control tab made it clear which instance I was about to change or commit from.

    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…)
    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. Locking/unlocking functionality

    Get rid of the option for anybody to unlock an object, but instead allow to unlock only by the person that locked the object or by a group in group role in the database where only few people have access.

    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  ·  Support Additional Source Control Systems  ·  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. Ability push database linking of database to team members

    When using a shared database development model having a location which allows you see which developers have linked to the database. Also having the ability to be able to push out the linking to the database to developers from a central point

    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…)
    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

17. Add 'Work Item Number' to the History screen for TFS users

    Add a column in the results for TFS customers so that they can see what Work Item was associated with the changeset

    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…)
    0 comments  ·  History/Log  ·  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. 'Modified' SVN Action over 'Replacing'

    Issue: In most cases, committing changes from the Commit tab marks 'Action' in SVN logs as 'Replacing' than 'Modified'. This is creating a major tree conflict and related problems for us when trying to merge changes between branches.

    Suggested feature: add option in settings to change this behavior so that Source Control will always do 'Modified' for existing objects than 'Replacing'.

    https://productsupport.red-gate.com/hc/en-us/requests/165651

    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…)
    0 comments  ·  Better Support for Shared Db Dev Model  ·  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. Include Linked Servers as a versioned object

    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 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…)
    4 comments  ·  Static Data  ·  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. Diff panel doesn't save the text size

    When i change the diff panel text size and reopen the management studio, the text is not the size i have previously selected. Some other options (line numbers) doesn't save too.

    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…)
    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