Update: Microsoft will be moving away from UserVoice sites on a product-by-product basis throughout the 2021 calendar year. We will leverage 1st party solutions for customer feedback. Learn more here.

Brian Lawton

My feedback

  1. 66 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 577

    <=-=Dec 13 2007 3:33PM=-=>

    Dear Itzik.

    Thanks a lot for your feedback… and the strong voting support for this feature. Indeed, as you know, I am very much in favor of extending our functionality in this area. For a variety of reasons we did not get this into SQL Server 2008, but we are certainly looking into it for a future release.

    Keep the votes and comments coming…
    Michael

    PS: My apologies for the late official reply…

    <=-=Mar 10 2009 4:37PM=-=>

    I am a big fan of the ranking functions and partition by clause. I used them extensively. It was a fantastic inclusion in 2005. However, I can’t tell the number of times I wished DISTINCT worked with the count function. I can’t believe it wasn’t included in 2008!! So I’ve added my vote to get this in ASAP.

    <=-=Sep 15 2009 7:08AM=-=>

    yes this would be…

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  2. 65 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    16 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  3. 226 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    36 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  4. 379 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

    Upvotes: 249

    <=-=Oct 4 2016 2:15PM=-=>

    This is similar to my feedback located here: https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/2769130/sql-2016-temporal-tables-with-triggers. The solution I suggest is similar to this, and could be used in many different cases developing using SQL server.

    <=-=Jan 10 2017 9:43AM=-=>

    I would love this too. The issue is that many/most applications don’t use Windows Auth in the connection to SQL Server (connection pooling issues, etc), so SQL can’t get the User information

    <=-=Jan 10 2017 9:51AM=-=>

    @Sanford

    Just to clarify, I am not asking for an “automatically store user name” feature. I’m asking for “automatically store whatever I want, based on whatever expression I provide.” So the fact that the user name may or may not be available is not really relevant.

    That said, there are plenty of workarounds for various situations. I imagine that if you’re using a shared connection, you can get some notion of “user” some other…

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  5. 475 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  18 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  6. 1,192 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  195 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  7. 341 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

    From Apr 24, 2019 (https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2019/04/24/sql-server-management-studio-ssms-18-0-released-for-general-availability/):
    Think of these two tools not as separate tools doing different things, but as one integrated tool. Each tool has different experiences built into it and can be launched from the other seamlessly.

    From Oct 20,2020 (https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2020/10/20/sql-server-management-studio-18-7-now-generally-available/):
    SQL Server Management Studio is a foundational tool for many working with Microsoft data solutions. First released in 2018, Azure Data Studio is a cross-platform and open source desktop environment for data professionals using the Azure Data family of on-premises and cloud data platform solutions. Architecturally, SQL Server Management Studio has long been combined with additional tools, including Profiler, Database Engine Tuning Advisor (DTA), and Database Mail. As Azure Data Studio continues to mature, the Microsoft data tools experience on Windows has become a combination of SSMS and Azure Data Studio. Beginning in the 18.7 release of SQL Server Management Studio, Azure Data Studio…

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  8. 178 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  9. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Brian Lawton commented  · 

    VS 2019 v16.4.4 is still throwing errors because of this while editing. Once the editor window is closed, the errors go away with both compiles and publishing working fine. The false negatives while editing are very distracting.

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  10. 4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Brian Lawton commented  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Brian Lawton commented  · 

    For what it's worth, I ran into the same problem while attempting to upgrade an existing SQL 2017 w/CU17 instance running under Windows Server 2016. Luckily the fix/workaround was the same...uninstall ODBC, OLEDB, and SQLCLI, reboot, manually re-install all three, then reboot again before SQL 2019 was able to complete successfully.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Brian Lawton commented  · 

    I had the same issue. For me I was attempting to install side-by-side with the existing SQL 2017 instance on my laptop (Windows 10 1903 build 18362.449). There's nothing complicated about either instance in that the only components I have are the Engine, Client Connectivity Tools and Client SDK. All three are reporting a dependency failure however other than the standard firewall warning, all rules passed. This laptop also has VS 2019 (v16.3.8) with SDDT and I updated SSMS to 18.4 earlier today. I waited for the RTM version before attempting an install so this laptop has never had any pre-RTM versions of SQL 2019 installed. This blog post (https://sqlquantumleap.com/2019/05/05/error-2068643839-1602-installing-msoledbsql-msi-and-msodbcsql-msi-for-sql-server-2019-ctp-2-5/) end up being the needed fix. Specifically, I had to uninstall ODBC, OLEDB, and SQLCLI, reboot, manually re-install all three, then reboot again before SQL 2019 was able to complete successfully. IMO, there’s something wrong with the SQL 2019 RTM installer with respect to side-by-side installations which needs to be fixed. Thanks!

    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  11. 334 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    18 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  12. 650 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    22 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  13. 1,277 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    113 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  14. 24 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    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  · 
  15. 117 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    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  · 
  16. 56 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    unplanned  ·  5 comments  ·  SQL Server » Setup + Deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Brian Lawton supported this idea  · 
  17. 60 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    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  · 
  18. 350 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 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  · 
  19. 235 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    8 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  · 
  20. 102 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    21 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

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    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  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base