Skip to content

Settings and activity

13 results found

  1. 5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Dan W commented  · 

    It sounds like this would also make it easier to deal with our elevated user situation where I need to run SSMS as an elevated user account for any database updates, but it's difficult to keep Excel activated for that elevated user account (that gets used for Excel when selecting the "Open in Excel" option. If the "Open in Excel" feature allowed a copy-paste option, it would be easier to bridge that gap and still benefit from the wonderful Excel formatting that SQL Prompt does.

    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  2. 20 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  3. 6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Dan W commented  · 

    DIY manual work-around without all the fancy automatic actions:
    -- /*
    code to use or hide
    -- */

    Remove the -- before /* to hide the section; Re-add -- before /* to enable the section. Leave "-- */" as-is because it's always valid

  4. 6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Prompt  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  5. 4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Prompt  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  6. 6 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  ·  SQL Compare  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  7. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  8. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Prompt  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W shared this idea  · 
  9. 13 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Dan W commented  · 

    I think this is a great idea! That would add so much freedom to let SQL Source Control do it's thing while I go about my work!

    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  10. 24 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  11. 5 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  ·  SQL Compare  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Dan W commented  · 

    I have an implementation option to recommend. In keeping with the rest of the error handling, simply put the IF @@ERROR <> 0 SET NOEXEC ON after the USE [my_database] statement in the synchronization script, such as:
    USE [my_database]
    GO
    IF @@ERROR <> 0 SET NOEXEC ON
    GO

    This doesn't protect against scripts from being run against the right database on the wrong server, but it at least it prevents scripts from being applied if the change to the expected target database fails.

    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  12. 14 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W supported this idea  · 
  13. 9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dan W supported this idea  ·