User-Defined Dependency Tracking
dhathewa
Posts: 10
I don't think this is redundant, I checked around the forum and help topics and found no info on this item.
Some of our stored procedures do EXECs on strings to manipulate data. There are usually db objects referenced by these EXECs. Dependency Tracker doesn't track these "invisible" dependencies but we do need to track them.
Is it possible to manually add a "User-Defined" dependency to an object? Then, this item's dependencies could be tracked and the dependencies of items dependent on those items could be automatically added.
Some of our stored procedures do EXECs on strings to manipulate data. There are usually db objects referenced by these EXECs. Dependency Tracker doesn't track these "invisible" dependencies but we do need to track them.
Is it possible to manually add a "User-Defined" dependency to an object? Then, this item's dependencies could be tracked and the dependencies of items dependent on those items could be automatically added.
Comments
Have you considered using SQL Search to find these types of dependencies?
David Atkinson
Red Gate Software
Product Manager
Redgate Software
Or I could just do the basic dependencies into a spreadsheet, search for EXECs and send that list of stored procs offshore to get a list of further dependencies at $15/hour.
OK... I get that there's no feature in the product to do this, which is a huge disappointment, but there are certainly other dbas out there that have dynamic SQL. "Have you considered using SQL Search?" is a disappointing answer.
Please don't dismiss SQL Search as an option just yet. There's really little reason not to give it a go given that it's a free tool.
http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQL_Search/
Kind regards,
David
Product Manager
Redgate Software
declare @testfail int
set @testfail = 0
if @testfail = 1 select top 1 * from X where 0 = 1
It seems to provide the dependency tracking information I need but it won't ever return anything and doesn't seem to change the way the proc runs.
Does anyone think there is a disadvantage to this that I've overlooked? There's probably a performance hit but when compared to the performance of assembling and executing a string, I doubt that it's a big deal.