search

vieten / sequel-pro

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/sequel-pro
Other
0 stars 0 forks source link

[REQ] Be able to sync two databases structure and/or data #72

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
It would be nice if you could sync the structur of 2 databases or its data
similar to what navicat allows you to do

Original issue reported on code.google.com by lauber.p...@gmail.com on 29 Oct 2008 at 9:32

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by stuart02 on 27 Nov 2008 at 2:09

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by stuart02 on 28 Nov 2008 at 7:21

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I vote for this as well.  Maintaining structure between local dev db and 
production
db is kind of a pain.

Original comment by mainstre...@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2008 at 3:07

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
You're interested in sync between production to dev or the other way around? 
Sync
structure, data or structure and data?

Original comment by ursache....@gmail.com on 21 Feb 2009 at 8:04

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
edxactly

Original comment by lauber.p...@gmail.com on 23 Feb 2009 at 7:34

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Optional.  

When I develop locally, I manually track my changes (ALTER TABLE) in some 
separate file that I then have to 
constantly go and update on the production server.  Several bugs have been 
logged due to inconsistent structure.

The data-sync between the two is less critial.  There's another bug where 
simply logging all ALTER statements 
would be excellent.

Original comment by mainstre...@gmail.com on 24 Feb 2009 at 2:42

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by avenja...@gmail.com on 14 May 2009 at 2:58

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by avenja...@gmail.com on 14 May 2009 at 4:28

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I would love to have a tool for synchronizing two databases inside Sequel Pro.

Original comment by erik.joh...@gmail.com on 4 Aug 2009 at 6:00

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
SQLyog (both editions... the paid Enterprise version and the free Community 
version) has this feature, but it's 
only available on Windows and Linux. It lets you copy structure and data or 
just structure, and you can 
optionally drop existing conflicting tables. You can also select which entities 
(specific tables, events, triggers, 
etc.) to copy. I'm attaching a screen shot of the copy dialog... you just 
connect to both databases, select one of 
them, and use the Copy to Another Host/Server command.

My Mac-based team does both types of copies all the time, and it'd be *great* 
if Sequel Pro could take over 
this function. It's the one function from the community yog that absolutely 
cannot do without. As such, we 
run yog in Wine (which works pretty well, actually).

Original comment by aikido....@gmail.com on 19 Nov 2009 at 8:19

Attachments:

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by stuart02 on 31 Mar 2010 at 12:10

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Issue 439 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by stuart02 on 16 May 2010 at 6:32

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I've been using this: http://www.mysqldiff.org/

Original comment by fil...@mac.com on 15 Jun 2010 at 7:54

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I am in support of this as well. Somehow I missed this when creating my own 
feature request for the same thing. So sorry, mods!

Original comment by aaro...@gmail.com on 26 Sep 2010 at 8:58

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Issue 846 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by schlabbe...@gmail.com on 26 Sep 2010 at 9:07

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
This would be an amazing feature to add. It's pretty much the _only_ reason 
we're using Navicat.

Original comment by espad...@gmail.com on 30 Sep 2010 at 1:39

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Agreed - in fact juts being able to drag and drop tables from one open database 
to another would be great (even if you don't have full data sync).

Original comment by SonsOThu...@gmail.com on 30 Sep 2010 at 6:07

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Issue 778 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by schlabbe...@gmail.com on 30 Sep 2010 at 7:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Issue 962 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by stuart02 on 29 Jan 2011 at 8:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Yes, this will be a very nice feature, syncing db structures is an important 
step in dev workflow.

Original comment by philippe...@gmail.com on 14 Jun 2011 at 10:49

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Such a feature looks like a big undertaking, but it would be awesome for people 
who work in both local and remote environments, and don't want unidirectional 
replication.

Some sort of difference view between two tables, where one could perform 
operations such as replace and merge on whole tables, or cherry pick changes 
row by row and column by column, would simply *kill* :)!

Original comment by lou...@gmail.com on 12 Jul 2011 at 10:56

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Is it more likely that you're copying/syncing from one database to another on 
the same host? Or would copying/syncing to a database on another host also be 
just as important?

Original comment by avenja...@gmail.com on 12 Jul 2011 at 12:32

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
In my current setup, I have one local database and one on my remote host. They 
become out of sync when a) I add new features and content on my local one and 
b) users and admins occasion changes in the remote one.

Though syncing / copying on the same host would also ease the management of 
test or temporary databases.

Original comment by lou...@gmail.com on 12 Jul 2011 at 12:54

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I think the primary use case has to be across hosts, but sync targets are the 
easy part :)

Original comment by rowanb@gmail.com on 12 Jul 2011 at 1:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I mostly support what lou...@gmail.com has said, selecting/merging/etc changes 
would be great, especially a view to see two tables at the same time (maybe 
this feature should be requested separately) but for start a simple ability to 
copy/update tables or whole DB to another host (or same) would be most 
excellent :)

Original comment by marko.br...@gmail.com on 13 Jul 2011 at 6:53

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I would also like to vote for the copy to host/db feature.  Not necessarily 
true "synchronization", which is a little different from copies (see 
mk-table-sync).  As opposed to more sophisticated approaches, I would just say, 
while having a given  target table selected, opening a dialog that selects:

(a) A connected host
(b) A target database

and offers the options of:

(1) SCHEMA vs SCHEMA+DATA copy, 
(2) a DROP TABLE IF EXISTS option.

Original comment by colin.mu...@gmail.com on 1 Aug 2011 at 2:54

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Issue 1155 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by stuart02 on 20 Aug 2011 at 9:23

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I also vote for this feature, especially like the person above me stated, "copy 
to host/db feature.  Not necessarily true "synchronization"".
Thanks!

Original comment by j...@fyrastudio.com on 18 Nov 2011 at 7:33

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
FWIW: I'd love to see this in SequelPro, but in the meantime if you need to do 
this you can run SQLYog via CrossOver. May work in vanilla Wine, but I haven't 
tried that.

Original comment by chrisblo...@gmail.com on 13 Jan 2012 at 12:39

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by abhibeck...@gmail.com on 24 Mar 2012 at 1:15

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I need this as well. Thanks a ton

Original comment by yankeyho...@gmail.com on 4 Jun 2012 at 8:42

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Issue 1426 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by rowanb@gmail.com on 16 Aug 2012 at 2:40

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I'd use this feature as well, but please careful not to make it useless by 
forcing a table drop to synchronize only the structure....  

It should be a "synchronize" on the structure (Alter), not the data.... and 
like others, I don't care about the data, because there are other ways to 
handle that, but managing a dev->staging->production DB cycle is impossible 
without this and I currently use sqlYog for it

Original comment by susiebee...@gmail.com on 1 Sep 2012 at 12:47

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I'd love to see this too. All I really need is an automated way to dump a 
remote DB and import it into a local DB and update structure (with an option to 
just replace local entirely, etc.). A one-click approach to this would be 
fantastic.

Original comment by riverbra...@gmail.com on 17 Jan 2013 at 8:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I'd really would love this option too!

Original comment by kpoelhe...@gmail.com on 6 Feb 2013 at 3:21

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Why is this low priority? IMO this is a must have... will continue to use 
navicat until this is added

Original comment by justineg...@gmail.com on 30 Jul 2013 at 10:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Would also love this feature!

Original comment by gabssnake on 21 Aug 2013 at 1:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Would like to see this too.  It's important that it be able to do a partial 
sync though, I always have some server specific settings in a few places that 
shouldn't get updated between DBs.

Original comment by jbrown...@gmail.com on 7 Oct 2013 at 1:25

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I don't know if this should be a separate idea (because I'm not sure I would 
really want to use syncing to replicate a change to production or another 
developer's database) but in my view, generating a migration script (SQL, 
perhaps allowing the ability to customize around it so we can create scripts 
for our applications; ie PHP) that includes changes since the last migration 
date. Then we could drop that migration script in a migration folder, similar 
to how Laravel does it, which the application can then migrate when it detects 
a new change. I think that would work for the vast majority of application 
developers and be a lot easier than syncing between databases; may be able to 
leverage what is already tracked in the console.

Original comment by redc...@gmail.com on 7 Nov 2013 at 9:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I am getting ready to promote significant changes from development to 
production (on the same host).  In the absence of this feature, I've got 15 
scripts, created during the development process, to run in hopefully an order 
that works.

It would be nice if a Sequel Pro developer would add to this thread describing 
the challenge to creating this feature.  (This conversation shows six other 
threads being "merged in" so it appears to be a frequently requested feature.)

Original comment by b...@heyjoynin.com on 6 Mar 2014 at 11:13

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
The "duplicate database" menu option could even be extended to allow 
overwriting of another connection's database. I want to periodically replace my 
local (production) server with the live public version of the database, 
structure and/or content.

Original comment by Sly.Kni...@gmail.com on 7 Mar 2014 at 8:59

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Issues are now kept at GitHub: https://github.com/sequelpro/sequelpro/issues/72
Please do not comment here. 

This will be ignored and the issue will not be updated.

Original comment by schlabbe...@gmail.com on 7 Mar 2014 at 10:25