|
|
Posted by Plamen Ratchev on 05/17/07 12:21
"Erland Sommarskog" <esquel@sommarskog.se> wrote in message
news:Xns993378BB3B1BYazorman@127.0.0.1...
> Plamen Ratchev (Plamen@SQLStudio.com) writes:
>
> Beware however that the SMO method is very unreliable. I don't know
> how many bug reports I have submitted for it during the beta programme of
> SQL 2005 and also after release. They have fixed quite a few bugs, but
> when I tested what's in SP2, I had reason to file a couple of new bugs,
> even if they were for less serious issues.
>
> There are quite a few features that does not work with the SMO method.
> If you have a CLR user-defined type, the transfer fails. Certificates
> are not copied. To name a few.
>
> Since Steve had problem recreating the issue from the production database
> in his test environment, I don't think it is a good idea to use a method
> that is known to distort the source. BACKUP/RESTORE is definitely the
> way to go.
>
I have myself used the SMO method only a few times for very small databases.
Backup and restore is really what I prefer and using the Copy Database
wizard was more out of curiosity what it offers. Thanks for pointing out the
issues, good to know that.
Plamen Ratchev
http://www.SQLStudio.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|