Redgate Sql Compare 11
Number of employees 280 (2016) Website Redgate Software is a software company based in,. It develops tools for developers and data professionals and maintains community websites such as SQL Server Central and Simple Talk.
It conducts events such as SQL in the City. Redgate produces specialized tools for,. It also produces advanced developer tools for, such as SmartAssembly. From 2007 to 2013 it was featured in the in the United Kingdom. It has won numerous industry awards for its management software. Contents.
History The company was founded by Neil Davidson and Simon Galbraith in October 1999. It is named after Via Porta Rossa (Red Gate Street) in, Italy, close to where Davidson used to live.
In 2005, Redgate launched Simple Talk, an online technical journal and community hub for working and developers, as well as systems and database administrators. The journal is sponsored by Redgate, but retains. In addition to publishing articles, Simple Talk publishes books, most of which are available in a. On 20 August 2008, Redgate announced it was taking responsibility for future development of the free tool.
On 22 March 2010, HyperBac Technologies (formerly known as Xceleon Technologies) was acquired by Redgate. HyperBac developed SQL software tools and products.
In August 2009, Redgate launched Springboard, a startup based in Cambridge, UK. For a period of three months Redgate provided living expenses and mentoring for teams to work from Redgate's offices. It was similar to and in that it provided a small amount of capital up front but no equity was taken. In 2010, Redgate re-launched Springboard with a different model where teams would again receive and mentoring, but this time in exchange for an stake. One such recipient of investment-for-equity in 2016 was Berlin-based 3T Software Labs, makers of, the for, a popular NoSQL database.
On March 7, 2017, at the launch of, Microsoft announced the inclusion of Redgate Data Tools in that product. Three components were included: ReadyRoll Core and SQL Prompt Core, both in the Enterprise edition of Visual Studio 2017, and SQL Search in all editions.
29 April 2005. Retrieved 2008-10-01. Kanjilal, Joydip (2015-09-29). Kunk, Joe (2010-06-23). Visual Studio Magazine. 4 February 2007. Retrieved 2009-08-22.
2 March 2008. Retrieved 2009-08-22. 1 March 2009. Archived from on 2011-10-06.
Retrieved 2011-02-28. 28 February 2010. Archived from on 2011-10-06. Retrieved 2011-02-28. 27 February 2011.
Archived from on 2011-04-13. Retrieved 2011-02-28. 26 February 2012. Archived from on 2012-08-02.
Retrieved 2012-02-28. 3 March 2013. Archived from on 2013-04-19. Retrieved 2013-03-04. SQL Server Pro. 18 November 2011. Retrieved 2 February 2016.
SQL Server Pro. 19 November 2012.
Retrieved 2 February 2016. SQL Server Pro. 22 November 2013. Retrieved 2 February 2016. ^ Jacobs, Emily (11 November 2015). Retrieved 2 February 2016. Retrieved 2008-10-01.
Retrieved 2011-01-10. Red Gate Software. Retrieved 26 April 2013. Retrieved 26 April 2013. Retrieved 26 April 2013. Red Gate Software. Retrieved 26 April 2013.
Cramblitt, Bob (2008-08-20). Archived from on 2008-08-22. Retrieved 2008-08-20. Archived from on 7 January 2011. Retrieved 2 February 2011.
Davidson, Neil. Archived from on 25 July 2011.
Retrieved 17 January 2011. Cambridge Network. Retrieved 6 June 2016. Fearby, Simon. Retrieved 10 February 2017.
Retrieved 7 June 2017. Database Trends and Applications. Retrieved 2017-12-31. Database Trends and Applications. Retrieved 2017-12-31. Database Trends and Applications. Retrieved 2017-12-31.
Database Trends and Applications. Retrieved 2017-12-31. Retrieved 2017-12-31. Database Trends and Applications.
Retrieved 2017-12-31. Retrieved 2017-12-31. ^ Inc, 1105 Media. GlobeNewswire News Room. Retrieved 2017-12-31. DevOps Industry Awards. Retrieved 2017-12-31.
External links. (technical journal and community hub). (SQL Server education and community website). (technical journal).
I’m still not Brent. My name’s Alex, and I care about databases, DevOps and data protection. Last year, and back in May.
Now, dear reader, I’m going to review and compare the two most popular tools to help you put it all together: Microsoft. I hope this post will help you to decide which is more likely to suit you and your team. But first Why SSDT or SQL Source Control and not something else? Good question. Firstly, there are two styles of database source control and deployment: Model (aka “state”) and Migrations.
But the tl;dr is that neither are perfect, both hold value, and generally you do need to pick one or the other. To avoid getting tangled up in higher level debates about whether to adopt a migrations-based or a model-based source control solution – or even a hybrid, this blog post is specifically scoped to model-based source control solutions. So what about alternative model-based solutions? I believe it’s important to use widely used and supported tools wherever possible. SSDT and SQL Source Control are the two most widely used tools in Europe and North America for model-based source control and deployment of SQL Server databases. Other model-based tools certainly exist (see, and for example) but none are anywhere near as widely used or trusted for SQL Server databases as either SSDT or Redgate SQL Source Control. So let’s get stuck in.
Ease of use Implementing database source control or continuous integration is a big change for your team and it will be hard on your developers and you will move more slowly to begin with. Choosing a tool that is easy to adopt will make your life much easier and lead to a far greater chance of success.
Redgate SQL Source Control plugs right into SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS), whereas SSDT lives in Visual Studio (VS). This is enormous. If your developers and DBAs prefer to work in SSMS, SQL Source Control may feel very natural to them, but Visual Studio is full of new concepts: Solutions files? Project files? The list goes on.
This makes the learning curve much more difficult for people who are used to working in SSMS. It’s not entirely one-sided however. The SSDT table designer is amazing, combining the SSMS table designer and a query window and allowing you to use whichever you prefer. SSDT Table Designer On balance, SQL Source Control is much easier and more natural tool for most database folks. Winner: Redgate Refactoring When deployments scripts are generated by schema comparison tools, which do not look at or understand your data, there are some scenarios which can cause the software problems. For example:.
Renaming a column or table. Splitting a table. Adding a new NOT NULL column Both SSDT and Redgate SQL Source Control have features to help you in these scenarios, but the SSDT features are better.
Redgate’s “” feature is hard to understand and has a tendency to break in nasty ways and cripple your performance. In contrast SSDT gives you both and the. SSDT pre- and post-deploy scripts are a pain to maintain, but ultimately, they work more reliably.
In fairness, Redgate have, so they aren’t far behind – but the Redgate scripts do not support SQLCMD variable syntax like the SSDT version does and they do not have anything like the refactor log. Winner: SSDT Filters Perhaps you aren’t interested in versioning objects prefixed with “test”. Or perhaps you want to filter out some other objects that are supposed to exist in your dev environment, but not production, such as? This is a big win for Redgate – are, frankly, awesome. Whether you want to filter out something small (like ) or whether you want to set up your own naming conventions, these things work a treat.
Redgate Sql Compare 11 Serial Number Crack
You can even use them to do quite complicated stuff to, but I’d generally discourage going down that road if you can. Redgate SQL Source Control filters In contrast, while SSDT does include some filtering functionality in Visual Studio’s schema compare tool, it’s not as easy to source control your filters and to use them when publishing DACPACs to production environments. What you can do you need to do with PowerShell and the Schema Compare API, as. I’d also like to put in an honorary shout out to which makes the process a little easier, as long as your database folks are comfortable playing with C#, APIs and DLLs etc.
Another option SSDT provides, which is lacking in Redgate SQL Source Control, is to create partial projects with database references. To demonstrate how this works, read. While I prefer the way Redgate handles tSQLt for you, others like the way the SSDT database reference approach separates the tests from the rest of your code. To summarise: The Redgate approach to filtering is generally easier to manage, especially if your team includes folks who aren’t.NET developers.
Winner: Redgate Static data Redgate – just right-click and select the tables you want and voila. Static data in Redgate SQL Source Control However, there are a few issues with it.
All static data tables require a primary key (although, to be fair, they should have one anyway!). The scripts generated are not easily ‘diff-able’ because changes to the data do not appear in-line. Column level or row level versioning, (e.g.
To support seed data), is not supported. It’s all or nothing. Adding lots of static data can have a negative impact on performance.
In SSDT static data is handled using. Your post deploy scripts can be a pain to manage and the MERGE scripts can be annoying to write by hand, but these pains can be minimised by separating out the data scripts into multiple scripts/stored procedures that are simply executed by a single coordinating post deploy script, and by using to create your merge scripts. If you can get over the pain, SSDT allows you to create data scripts that are “diff-able” and with far greater flexibility, for example to support seed data.
All that being said, since you can now add a post-deploy script in Redgate SQL Source Control, this means Redgate can support both options. Winner: Redgate Money Redgate costs money. SSDT is free with Visual Studio. You can, but you also want the automated deployment bits and that increases the cost because each team member will need a licence for the full. At the end of the day, free is always going to be more attractive than not free, so if this was the only issue, clearly we would all use SSDT.
The decision you need to make is whether the benefits listed above are worth the additional expense. Winner: SSDT More detail There is a lot more to say so this post risks getting very long. The first draft was over four times longer than this version! Hence, I’ve created a much more detailed whitepaper to partner this blog post. You can download it from the DLM Consultants website: The full whitepaper covers all the issues listed above in much more detail, as well as also discussing:. Shared development databases. Security.
Deployment. Support.
Complex projects The full whitepaper has been peer-reviewed by Brent Ozar, a long list of SSDT and Redgate power users, as well as representatives from both Redgate and the Microsoft MVP program. I hope you find it useful. Summary To re-cap, here are our winners for each category:. Ease of use: Redgate. Refactoring: SSDT. Filters: Redgate.
Static data: Redgate. Money: SSDT So which is better? Which would I recommend? Well, like most things, it depends. If there was a simple answer you probably wouldn’t be asking the question.
If you have read all the above and anything has jumped out at you as being particularly important to you and your team, great. Otherwise, if you are still undecided, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. SSDT comes free with Visual Studio and Redgate offer a free trial – so download both and give them a try. When I went to visit Farm Credit Mid-America, we set up three parallel proof of concepts (PoCs) and our cross-functional team voted (unanimously) for their favourite.
As a result, implementation was much easier for them. Alex Yates at Farm Credit Mid-America Whichever you choose, both products are an excellent investment of your time and/or money. Want to learn more?
I hope this post has helped you to figure out whether SSDT/Visual Studio Database Projects or Redgate SQL Source Control are likely to be a better fit for you and your organisation. If you would like my support to build your own proof of concept, get in touch through. Alternatively, why not sign up for one of my “Database DevOps: What, Why and How” classes? Every attendee will be provisioned with their own VM on which they will build their own source control and deployment PoC using either Redgate or SSDT with Git and Azure DevOps Services.
All classes are delivered online on either an EU friendly or US friendly timezone. Early bird 30% discounts available until Jan 8th! Current schedule (at time of writing):. Jan 21-22, 2019: SSDT (US hours). Jan 24-25, 2019: Redgate (EU hours).
Jan 28-29, 2019: Redgate (US hours). Jan 31-Feb 1, 2019: SSDT (EU hours) You can. If you aren’t yet decided, read the reviews: Redgate SSDT. I have to strongly disagree with the white paper that SQL Source Control is superior when it comes to deployments and CI/CD pipelines – this has always been a massive win for SSDT, and almost entirely worth the trade off of some of the missing features (what I wouldn’t give for better static data management in SSDT). The ability to validate and create a build artifact using the underlying API and common build tools (MSBuild) without having to actually connect to a database instance to deploy it for validation and without a really expensive licensing outlay is a huge benefit. The fact that SQL Source carried all that deployment baggage with it made it a complete non-starter.
We used Redgate SourceControl in the pre-implemantation phase of our main tool for about 2 years, but stopped to used it before going life (in autumn 2016). – It is a nice tool to quickly see the differences between your local database and the checked-in state – it is good for small databases – it became terrible slow for bigger databases, particulary when you use migration scripts (we have 1,500 objects and I have to wait 1 min for each compare) – to make it more painful, they decided (whyever) to refresh the commit / get latest page every time you switch to it from another window (wait again, just because you checked something in another script). The existing user voice to change this stupid behavior is ignored since years. – it automatical changes the the database every time automatical, you click on another database in the object explorer - wait again – the created deployment scripts works well, as long it are only minor changes (or only changes to e.g. Stored procedures) – when the changes are a little bit more complicated (e.g.
Hi Thomas, I totally get your pain. SQL Source Control does struggle to do all it needs to do while embedded in the 32 bit SSMS and limited to 2GB of RAM. And many people have issues with the auto refresh.
Fortunately, Redgate have been working on the performance stuff and they recently fixed the auto refresh issue. Whether or not this would go far enough to fix your problems I can’t answer: Some of the other issues you raise are common to all “model-based” source control solutions, including both SQL Source Control and SSDT. The “Refactoring” section in this blog explains some of the features that SSDT and Redgate provide to help deal with those scenarios and sides with SSDT as the better solution. Fundamentally, however, if this is a regular problem it probably is wise to move to a “migrations-based” approach – as you have done. One word of caution – and I realise this may be a little late for you but it may be relevant to other readers: Before coding the migrations tool yourself, I would encourage you to check out some of the open source tools that are available, like DbUp or Flyway.
With respect, these have probably had more thought and time sunk into them than a home-grown solution and they mostly have decent documentation and a community of folks who can help you. In contrast, I’ve witnessed many home grown deployment solutions that are poorly maintained and documented and they can create their own problems. If you are looking for a migrations tool that includes many of the bits you liked in SQL Source Control (and you are happy to pay for it) you should also consider Redgate’s SQL Change Automation Visual Studio Extension (previously known as ReadyRoll). This will generate your scripts for you and run them in sequence, but if you want to edit a script, because it drops those 20 important tables for example, you can. If you are interested, I’ve written more on the pros and cons of the migrations-driven approach vs the model-driven approach here: Best wishes. We considered to use ReadRoll (now Redgate’s SQL Change Automation Visual Studio Extension), but since it uses Visual Studio and we not (our app is a web app with a Delphi sevice in the background), it was not really a solution for us (it would, if they will integrate it into SSMS). Thanks for the hint relating the auto-refresh (although I think, that manually editing a configuration XML file is not really a solution – they should really consider to pay a developer for 15 minutes to add this into the option dialog).