EAP 2.0 Impressions
blitzd
Posts: 40
Hi,
My org is using the EAP 2.0 version of source control due to a bug in 1.1 which precludes using it with spatial indexes. We've been trying out some of the new features and had a few impressions we'd like to share:
1) Static data... on the face of it this seems like a really good idea, but it seems to make the check for changes take a horribly long time for anything but the smallest of static data tables. A table with some 80,000 rows for instance, results in the check for changes taking upwards of 10 minutes each time it's done. Maybe it would be useful if the product could be configured to only occasionally check for changes in these tables? They are supposed to be static, after all. I know it would be useful for our scenario where we WANT the data in source control, but we don't want every other check for changes in the schema to take 15 minutes.
2) The shared dev model functionality is also nice, but it never seems to pick up the other users that are making the changes. All I ever get listed is myself, and 'User not available'.
My org is using the EAP 2.0 version of source control due to a bug in 1.1 which precludes using it with spatial indexes. We've been trying out some of the new features and had a few impressions we'd like to share:
1) Static data... on the face of it this seems like a really good idea, but it seems to make the check for changes take a horribly long time for anything but the smallest of static data tables. A table with some 80,000 rows for instance, results in the check for changes taking upwards of 10 minutes each time it's done. Maybe it would be useful if the product could be configured to only occasionally check for changes in these tables? They are supposed to be static, after all. I know it would be useful for our scenario where we WANT the data in source control, but we don't want every other check for changes in the schema to take 15 minutes.
2) The shared dev model functionality is also nice, but it never seems to pick up the other users that are making the changes. All I ever get listed is myself, and 'User not available'.
Comments
I have created a new Feature Request for your first suggestion, reference SOC-2051.
Your second suggestion seems to coincide with an observation that one of our testers has made. I have therefore included your comment with his Bug Report, reference SOC-1913.
If you have any further observations or suggestions then we would really like to hear them.