Get Latest does not "force column order"

geno.pridageno.prida Posts: 3
edited February 18, 2011 11:04AM in SQL Source Control Previous Versions
Is there any way to force column order when doing a Get Latest?

Also, is there anyway to have custom filters like SQL Compare?
· Share on Twitter

Comments

  • David AtkinsonDavid Atkinson Posts: 1,462 Rose Gold 2
    Is it important that your column order is sync'ed when getting from source control? We'd definitely consider changing this behavior if others believe that this is the right thing to do. Please join the debate!

    Regarding filtering, we're working on specifying this feature now. Could you please describe which objects you'd like to filter out. Would you like to filter these objects so they never reach source control, or would you just want to exclude them from the commit list?

    Kind regards,

    David Atkinson
    Red Gate Software
    David Atkinson
    Product Manager
    Redgate Software
    · Share on Twitter
  • MartinUMartinU Posts: 14 Bronze 1
    We are currently evaluating SQL Source Control for a move from Visual Studio DB projects. I would say this is a very important aspect of deploying the source.

    We have several databases with some being very large in number of objects and it is very important to our organization that we are working from the exact code that is to be released.

    Additionally, if you don't have a mirror image of the source controlled code do you really have the "latest"?
    · Share on Twitter
  • David AtkinsonDavid Atkinson Posts: 1,462 Rose Gold 2
    We take your point that in a development environment, such as one that SQL Source Control is used with, the column ordering should be considered a difference. We've adding this change of behavior to our backlog.

    Thanks for highlighting this to us! Keep the feedback coming.

    David
    David Atkinson
    Product Manager
    Redgate Software
    · Share on Twitter
  • MartinUMartinU Posts: 14 Bronze 1
    Thanks, many times it is the little things that make a big difference. You all do a great job of being involved with the "users" and I believe that is why your products are so successful.
    · Share on Twitter
  • phil.monksphil.monks Posts: 1
    Hi,

    We've been using SQL source control for a few months now and have recently noticed this issue.

    Not syncing the column order is a big issue.

    We've just had an issue where a developer had an INSERT that just listed the data to be inserted. This worked fine when they tested it and then failed when the stored procedure was promoted live as the developer didn't have the correct column order.

    Whilst I understand that this is bad practice (and we have changed the SP), it does happen and it is valid.

    This issue undermines the source control if the tables are not a mirror image.

    Have you any indication as to when this feature may be implemented?

    Thanks
    · Share on Twitter
  • David AtkinsonDavid Atkinson Posts: 1,462 Rose Gold 2
    It's on our backlog and I would hope that we could squeeze this in before mid-year, although we can't make any hard commitments as we've also got static data to polish off, and object filtering to work on.

    We'll do our best!

    In the meantime please make sure that your insert statements reference the column names explicitly.

    Kind regards,

    David
    David Atkinson
    Product Manager
    Redgate Software
    · Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.