Brian Lawton

My feedback

  1. 23 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  5 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  2. 111 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  3. 44 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  SQL Server » Setup + Deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    We have a “Check for updates link” in the Tools menu today, and SSMS prompts you to upgrade when it detects a new version unless you have turned off auto-check for updates. We have no plans to further automate these updates. We are pushing more updates through WSUS for enterprise installations.

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  4. 49 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  5. 207 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 127

    <=-=Jun 23 2015 8:37AM=-=>

    I’m the first to post a useful comment. This must make me special.

    Seriously though, this would be an excellent solution to having to create a new “scratchdb” to hold my interim ETL data. This would be a major plus in simplifying design of a high performance app.

    <=-=Jul 3 2015 5:04AM=-=>

    In 2014, memory optimized tables, and delayed durability can be used help mitigate these Issues. However neither of this are always completely viable solutions. Brent’s proposed solution is likely the simplest way to achieve this with the least amount of unwanted impact. It is important to note that other platforms implement similar functionality as well. Notably Oracle.

    <=-=Nov 29 2016 3:58PM=-=>

    There are so many good things about this suggestion. I am amazed that SQL does not have the capability to turn off logging for certain tables that you define as no…

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  6. 132 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    7 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 278

    <=-=Feb 1 2008 7:18PM=-=>

    Thanks for the valuable suggestion.

    This seems more like adding the sequence support which we’re seriously considering for the next major release.

    Meanwhile, would using identity column help?

    <=-=Feb 2 2008 2:11AM=-=>

    It does not seem that you understood the request. This definitely has nothing to do with
    IDENTITY. I am less versed about sequences, but I don’t think they will cut it either. If you think
    it does, maybe you could provide an example? Take this problem: For the Orders table in
    Northwind, write a query that lists the number of orders for all days in 1997. The result set should
    include all 365 days, and list zero for days without a number.

    This is a typical problem where you need a table of of numbers (or dates). While it’s easy to
    create such a table, I argue in this request that…

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  7. 174 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  8 comments  ·  SQL Server » Setup + Deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  8. 27 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 19

    <=-=Mar 13 2015 2:44PM=-=>

    This is happening for me too; it’s been a long time issue in the SSDT. It creates noise when doing compares, merges, and checkins where these don’t pertain to the real changes of objects.

    Microsoft Visual Studio Ultimate 2013
    Version 12.0.31101.00 Update 4
    Microsoft .NET Framework
    Version 4.5.51209

    Installed Version: Ultimate

    Scaffolding: A framework for building and running code generators
    Server Explorer extensions for Microsoft Azure Websites

    NuGet Package Manager 2.8.50926.663
    NuGet Package Manager in Visual Studio. For more information about NuGet, visit http://docs.nuget.org/.
    SQL Server Data Tools 12.0.50226.0
    Microsoft SQL Server Data Tools

    <=-=Apr 1 2015 10:31AM=-=>

    Thank you for submitting this feedback. We are investigating this issue and will update when we have more information.

    Steven Green
    SQL Server Data Tools team

    <=-=Feb 1 2016 11:30AM=-=>

    This is one of those issues that convinces me that nobody at MSFT

    Brian Lawton commented  · 

    It's extremely frustrating that I continue having to explain this bug to clients after so many years. Why can't it be fixed?

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  9. 10 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Setup + Deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 12

    <=-=Apr 9 2014 7:43AM=-=>

    This is a significant reason why I have not yet adopted SSDT as my primary database development platform. I use this functionality extensively in VSDB projects.

    <=-=Apr 9 2014 8:16AM=-=>

    I want to convert my VS2010 DB projects to SSDT and the SQLCMD variable issue is definitely a hindrance.

    <=-=Jul 3 2014 3:57AM=-=>

    Schema Compare is practically unusable as is if you use SqlCmd variables and have multiple environments that you deploy to (i.e. dev, uat, live etc)… which is exactly the case that ssdt is designed mostly for.

    <=-=Oct 2 2014 11:04AM=-=>

    Hello all,

    Thank you for submitting this feedback and adding the comments. We are evaluating this request and will update you when we have more information.

    Xiaoning Ding
    SQL Server Tools Dev Team

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  10. 45 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 54

    <=-=Sep 4 2007 12:29PM=-=>

    If this is considered for a future version of SQL Server, please implement it according to the ISO SQL standard. In other words, implement the SQL Standard , which provides regular expression support through the operator [NOT] SIMILAR TO, which in the standard remains separate from LIKE.

    <=-=Sep 5 2007 7:05AM=-=>

    Like Steve, I would also like to stress that any implementation should be as per ANSI (SIMILAR predicate). The CLR functionality is not a relevant design consideration.

    <=-=Oct 15 2007 8:43AM=-=>

    This is a request we’ve heard a lot, and it’s of obvious value. I can’t promise when we’ll get to it—-it’s doubtful for this release—-but this is certainly on our radar.

    Cheers,
    -Isaac

    <=-=Mar 24 2010 2:54PM=-=>

    Hi,
    I have resolved this request as duplicate of feedback item below:

    https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/261342/regex-functionality-in-pattern-matching?wa=wsignin1.0


    Umachandar, SQL Programmability Team

    <=-=Mar 24 2010…
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  11. 10 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  12. 36 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  13. 213 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    8 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 72

    <=-=Mar 10 2016 11:26AM=-=>

    It’s a shame that this was submitted as just a “suggestion”. It should actually be listed as a “bug” because there’s only a comparatively small set of use cases where enumeration of the result set of elements is not important.

    <=-=Mar 11 2016 12:47PM=-=>

    I agree that an order column is required; one example use case is where two lists are passed in, and ordinal positions in one list correspond to positions in the other.

    <=-=Mar 11 2016 3:12PM=-=>

    Please see the related suggestion: STRING_SPLIT needs “RemoveEmptyEntries” option, like String.Split in .NET ( https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/2462002/ ).

    <=-=Mar 12 2016 12:02PM=-=>

    This kind of function is primarily needed for de-serializing previously serialized arrays of values of any type format-able as text.
    I therefore recommend to have the result set of this function work excellent with this use-case.

    With de-serialized arrays there is a need to…

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  14. 257 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    5 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 8

    <=-=Mar 5 2017 2:42PM=-=>

    Thanks for this idea. This is a valid requirement and I hope that it will get more votes. Currently we cannot confirm when it will be added, but it is in our backlog.

    <=-=May 22 2017 5:03AM=-=>

    would like it very much, particularly since you already have the CONCAT / GREATEST() a variable number of paramenters and does something with it…

    <=-=Jun 5 2017 12:31PM=-=>

    GREATEST / LEAST functions would be fantastic addition.

    <=-=Nov 14 2017 3:42PM=-=>

    The workarounds using CROSS APPLY or CASE expressions are difficult to manage and read. I’d love to see these implemented.

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  15. 59 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  2 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  16. 174 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  16 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  17. 99 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  18. 12 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  19. 29 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  20. 7 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  SQL Server » Setup + Deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton commented  · 
    Brian Lawton commented  · 

    Just a note that this issue still exists today when using the combination VS 2017 15.5.6 Enterprise with SSDT 15.5.2. A colleague opening the project I recently created us same tool versions except Professional edition encountered the hardcoded path. Once we change it to the expected relative path, the master reference worked as expected. This issue was my original submission via the old Connect site from when SSDT was still in "preview".

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base