First create a database script and create a database using SQL Server Management Studio, and then create a script

I had a friendly but heated argument with my lead developer the other day, because our project has TSQL scripts that I code directly into SQL files, which I then run against the database. I find that when I do this, it’s easy to work out the circuit in advance without pointing or clicking, and then there is no way to forget to generate a script to control the source code, since the script generation stops being you should do it after the fact, but this is an implicit part of the process (and also leads to cleaner scripts without unnecessary errors that SQL Server Management Studio inserts into the scripts it creates).

My lead developer insists that having a manual script is a pain in the ass and that he absolutely refuses to write his scripts manually when there are great tools for doing this without coding. I noticed that copying its changes to real scripts is usually a little delayed as a result.

What are your thoughts on the pros and / or cons of doing this one way against another? Am I too tough / old school in my hand coding scripting scenarios or does he rely too much on third-party tools and lose something in the process?

+3
source share
6 answers

I am always the script myself, because the wizards sometimes don’t do script things the way I like, and will also give funky default names

, , , script DDL

+2

, , . , , , .

+2

, ,

  • , (, , , * n ..)
  • , .
  • , .
  • SQL "diff" .

script ( "" ). .

, , , .

+1

script, SQLMS. SQLMS, , , script.

0

. , -, . , script, gui , ? script (Chance for error.).

, , - .

0

, ..........

0

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1711990/


All Articles