Best Of
Re: Formatting of OVER PARTITION and comma alignment
Hi,
Unfortunately there isn't a way to make the customization that granular. I would suggest visiting our SQL Prompt UserVoice site and putting that in as a feature request you'd like to see. Our project managers keep an eye on the suggestions there for new features to add to our products.
Unfortunately there isn't a way to make the customization that granular. I would suggest visiting our SQL Prompt UserVoice site and putting that in as a feature request you'd like to see. Our project managers keep an eye on the suggestions there for new features to add to our products.
JoshH
1 ·
Re: Tab History Removal - Why??????
ATurner said:Hi all,
SQL History has replaced tab history, thus it will not be coming back. However, the team is actively reading your feedback on what can be done to improve SQL History. In order to help us prioritize our development efforts, we would like to ask you to provide us with some concrete examples on how SQL history is not meeting your needs. This will help us understand your pain points better and address them more effectively.
I'll take that bet!
Speed, design, ease of use ,beta build and just plain old lack of consideration.
At launch SQL History was dog arse slow and more buggy than a pile of dog poop in the middle of summer. I will grant you that a year later and who knows how many updates later it's finally operating at an acceptable speed.
One major issue aside from speed was the drastic change in the UI between the 2. Tab History was a fast lightweight tool that at times one might think the thing was able to anticipate what you wanted. Even you guys saw SQL History as enough of being different from Tab History that you changed the name. I don't remember where this was I want to say someone from Red-Gate mentioned that SQL History was a new from the ground up product and not just Tab History with a whole lot of changes and additions. That means it was a different product yet instead of treating it as such you had it replace another product verses being an addition. I believe somewhere someone from RedGate said something along the lines of SQL History using resources (i.e.e files, locations, history, ect) and that's why the 2 couldn't co-exist and because SQL History made some changes to those resources there was no way to let customers pick between the 2. If true that was a design decision that could have been done differently. It looks like from the start the plan was to replace Tab History vs treating SQL HIstory as another product and that too was a choice you guys made not us. SQL History should have been a separate product that instead of taking over resources Tab History used it could have used it's own set and coped from Tab Historys resources what ever is needed so the 2 are separated. Had you done that so your customers could have a choice between the adoption of SQL History would have been a slow and lengthy process because after the messy state SQL History was in at release few would have been willing to give it a chance again anytime soon.
Tab History was an easy to use lightweight add-on that was great at what it did. Sure it didn't do as much as SQL History but maybe many or even a majority of your customers were happy with it like that; they weren't looking to to "Office Up" the thing. That's where a simple and effective software tool becomes bloated as the vendor keeps trying to find more things for it to do to justify customers continuing to upgrade. When Tab History was introduced I didn't need to get a How To manual or guide to figure it out. One of software developments biggest issues is that those working on the product know it inside and out so you can't see it the way your customer would, someone who doesn't know the thing like you do so what appears to be common knowledge to you isn't to the customer. Microsoft probably has the biggest screw-up in recent history on this when they pushed out that Ribbon UX in their products but at least for a few years they did make it optional. I'll tell you what I told their feedback dept about the ribbon, when the unwanted change you push out top your customers causes an entire industry of products to come into existence that are solely for the purpose of undoing the change you made and these tools are wanted enough that you can sell them, that should be a huge Red Flag to you, not something you close your eyes and say "nothing to see here, nothing to see here". For you guys it was just a free add-on and your customer base isn't large enough to spawn something like what the RIbbon did but you still followed the same pattern except you didn't give your customers time to pick between the 2.
There is also the simple lack of consideration. While Tab history was a free add-on it was a free add-on to a pay to use product so not really "free". It was also very clear to more than just a few of your paying customers that this thing wasn't really ready for release. You pushed out a beta product replacing something people clearly loved, Maybe I missed the memo but where did this demand for a replacement to Tab History come from in the first place? There may have been included in something somewhere in advance that "We are going to take away Tab History when we push this monster out" but it's very obvious many missed said memo and were completely caught off guard. What does it tell you when a portion of your customer base actively chooses to downgrade simply to avoid something you pushed out to them w/o any choice on their part? This may no longer be the case but I remember Tab History being an "optional" add-on meaning the amazing SQL Prompt could be used without being required to use Tab History. I believe the same was true with several other add-ons so that raises the question why was this thing which was clearly not ready for release, not optional?
The entire thing was a poorly handled mess that Redgate effectively was able to move past ONLY because of time and fixes so that SQL HIstory is no longer a beta product and most importantly b/c you did this with an add-on and not the core product. Had this stunt been pulled with SQL prompt itself you would have seen a very different result, likely loosing customers to a competitor. SQL prompt may be the best but it's not the only SQL tool out there. IDM's UltraEdit & UltraStudio products are always looking for that next thing they can add to their tools. They've looked at making it possible for their product to connect to data sources and if they had done that when you guys pulled this stunt you can bet I would have said goodbye and I doubt I'd have been the only one.
You guys really handled this very poorly, catching your customers off guard and then acting like as if it wasn't a big deal and with (what looked like) little care about it. Sure there was the expected apology that people expect companies have their lawyers draw up when they make a mess of things but today no one see's those as being anything genuine. You're very lucky that some gifted person/people over there were able to fix the kludgy thing and quickly. SQL history is still not as fast or easy to use as Tab History was and I wish I could give specific examples but I like many people usually stumble across those when we're under the gun ourselves and don't have time to pause what we are doing to write up a memo for you guys. In the end you got lucky. Your existing reputation and quality of products (of everything but SQL History) is likely why this wasn't worse for you in terms of customer retention but if you do this kind of thing again I wouldn't count on your customers, your paying customers, being as patient/tolerant.
EdCarden
2 ·
Re: Tab History Removal - Why??????
ATurner - Did you not run this by anyone in legal or public relations first? Your very first sentence has an undertone of sarcasm and frustration. Yes you follow it up with your reading feedback and working on the thing but when you are engaging with your customers about a mess you caused I wouldn't tell them "X has replaced Y and X isn't coming back". You instead could have written something like this:ATurner said:Hi all,
SQL History has replaced tab history, thus it will not be coming back. However, the team is actively reading your feedback on what can be done to improve SQL History. In order to help us prioritize our development efforts, we would like to ask you to provide us with some concrete examples on how SQL history is not meeting your needs. This will help us understand your pain points better and address them more effectively.
"SQL History has replaced Tab History in such a way that we can't bring Tab History back. Hindsight is always 20/20 and if we could have done it differently we would have but we can't. What we are doing is working on trying to fix SQL history and with your feedback we hope that it will one day be to you what Tab History was if not more."
Do you see the difference? Your message comes across like a frustrated parent disciplining their child; not a very good way to engage with your customers. Were you the one that made the call to replace Tab History with SQL History and so now you're frustrated that so many aren't happy with that decision? Or were you the one who created SQL History and so now your angry that so many are calling it garbage? I've enaged with RG employe Steve Jones many times and some where more complaints than compliments yet Steve was always professional.
EdCarden
2 ·
Re: no tables in code suggestions after upgrade to 10.14.14.8187
Hi Michael,
Thank you for your post. Are you using SSMS 18.12.1? If you are then there appears to be an issue currently with the latest version of SQL Prompt and SSMS 18.12.1. For now, the workaround is to roll back to SQL Prompt 10.14.10 as this would be before any changes were made to allow SQL Prompt to work in SSMS 20:
https://download.red-gate.com/checkforupdates/SQLPrompt/SQLPrompt_10.14.10.7538.exe
Thank you for your post. Are you using SSMS 18.12.1? If you are then there appears to be an issue currently with the latest version of SQL Prompt and SSMS 18.12.1. For now, the workaround is to roll back to SQL Prompt 10.14.10 as this would be before any changes were made to allow SQL Prompt to work in SSMS 20:
https://download.red-gate.com/checkforupdates/SQLPrompt/SQLPrompt_10.14.10.7538.exe
Ben_P
1 ·
Re: SQL Server Management Studio 19 Crashes after clicking SQL Search
Addition: SSMS still crashes if I just open RedGate Search and don't click on "Select object in Object Explorer" -- I just have to expand one of the items in ObjectExplorer and SSMS crashes. If I don't open Search at all, I can work without crashing.
PKincaid
1 ·
SQL Server Management Studio 19 Crashes after clicking SQL Search
I'm running SSMS 19.1 and RedGate Search 3.6.16.4399. Search seems to work but when I click on "Select object in Object Explorer" it crashes SSMS. Any solution? I've tried uninstalling/reinstalling RedGate Search -- same results. Thanks.
PKincaid
1 ·
Re: SQL Prompt Error with TextMgrP.dll Registration
I had just ran into the same issue with SQL Management Studio 20. This command fixed the issue for me ( I ran it As Administrator): regsvr32 "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio 20\Common7\IDE\Automation\TextMgrP.dll"
For context, I had SQL Management Studio version 19 installed, then installed version 20. I then uninstalled 19 (I didn't notice that SQL Prompt was not working at that time in version 20). This was couple days ago. Then this morning, I found new version of SQL Prompt on red gate's site that said it supported version 20 (version 10.14.11.7894) and installed it. Then got the TextMgrP.dll registration error. After running above command, the issue is fixed.
BTW, the error window says to do a repair from the Windows Control Panel. Version 20 no longer has the Repair option, so that message was not helpful.
For context, I had SQL Management Studio version 19 installed, then installed version 20. I then uninstalled 19 (I didn't notice that SQL Prompt was not working at that time in version 20). This was couple days ago. Then this morning, I found new version of SQL Prompt on red gate's site that said it supported version 20 (version 10.14.11.7894) and installed it. Then got the TextMgrP.dll registration error. After running above command, the issue is fixed.
BTW, the error window says to do a repair from the Windows Control Panel. Version 20 no longer has the Repair option, so that message was not helpful.
pczarn2
2 ·
Re: Support for SSMS 20
I have this same issue - I am working on a new PC with only SSMS v20 installed - I have grabbed all the latest versions of RedGate SQL Toolbelt installers I can find:abushpg said:The new installer isn't allowing me to proceed. It is allowing me to update SQL Multi Script, but SSMS Integration Pack is not available.Victoria W said:Hi all
I'm delighted to announce that our tools now support SSMS 20.
You can update your Redgate tools here:
https://download.red-gate.com/installers/SQLToolbelt/2024-03-28/
On this PC, I started from a fresh Windows installation last week (bad timing). I only installed SSMS 20, and then I installed SQL Toolbelt from installer version 3.4.0.2912, which I downloaded on 3/22/2024. So I don't have a previous version of SSMS or the SSMS Integration Pack installed.
- SQLSourceControl_7.7.9.18623 - this does work to install with SSMS v20
- SQL ToolBelt Installer version 3.4.0.2912 - this does not allow me to install the SSMS Integration Pack as it states I need an earlier version of SSMS
Is there a version of the SSMS Integration Pack that I can download that will work with SSMS v20?
davejhahn
1 ·
Re: Does anyone else's Community CLI not work?
I signed up for Flyway Community and followed the install wizard. I assume that I am using an outdated version because I installed it in late January.
jahmezz
1 ·
Re: Does anyone else's Community CLI not work?
EDIT: Your comments were right. The table name was wrong, causing the error. Debug output being on would have saved me. Thank you.
Tried it again on another computer that had Flyway Desktop installed.
Using Command Prompt...
flyway -X migrate -url=jdbc:postgresql://localhost:5432/database -locations=filesystem:./migrations -user=postgres -password=postgres
No output.
Even doing flyway version has no output.
flyway by itself outputs the help information.
Here is screenshot of the Flyway Desktop About screen on my computer. https://postimg.cc/t17rPfSP
The remaining database update to do was this...
Tried it again on another computer that had Flyway Desktop installed.
Using Command Prompt...
flyway -X migrate -url=jdbc:postgresql://localhost:5432/database -locations=filesystem:./migrations -user=postgres -password=postgres
No output.
Even doing flyway version has no output.
flyway by itself outputs the help information.
Here is screenshot of the Flyway Desktop About screen on my computer. https://postimg.cc/t17rPfSP
The remaining database update to do was this...
ALTER TABLE table
ADD COLUMN column10 NOT NULL DEFAULT 0;
After running flyway migrate, this does not apply. The flyway schema history remains unchanged.
But as I mention in the first comment, after uninstalling Flyway Desktop and installing the CLI, it worked just fine.
After running flyway migrate, this does not apply. The flyway schema history remains unchanged.
But as I mention in the first comment, after uninstalling Flyway Desktop and installing the CLI, it worked just fine.
jahmezz
1 ·