1
Vote

Some near-duplicate entries for columns

description

Version 1.1.0.0. App is running under Windows 7. Built using VS2008. Server is SQL Server 2008 R2.
 
In general things are working very smoothly. Right now I am using the tool to document the columns in one table. I have entered text into column descriptions and I manually created and filled in a Description extended property for the table. I used the exclusion list to exclude every table except one, and to exclude all other database objects (views, triggers, procedures, functions). No other table has column descriptions filled in. In the example workbook attached I have manually sanitized the descriptions and deleted most of the column entries and other worksheets. The thing to notice is blank or filled descriptions.
 
There are in the column list three pairs of near duplicates. The columns "Address," "Attachment," and "City" appear twice, but only the second of the pair shows the value that is in the column description. But other columns do not have duplicates. Two of the duplicates are nvarchar but one is an image.

file attachments

comments

wilsonch wrote Nov 11, 2010 at 11:13 PM

I am uploading a second (manually sanitized) example that shows a pattern of duplicated pairs of duplicate column entries when the same column name exists in two tables. I entered column descriptions for only one table. As I noted above, I am for some columns getting two column entries -- one with the description and one without. In this second example I am getting two pairs of entries, one pair for the table with column descriptions, and the second pair for the look-up table that has a column with the same name (but no descriptions). For both tables there is one column entry with the column description and one without it. [The first example (above) included a column (Attachment) that does not exist in the look-up tables I included in the second-example run. So duplicates can happen whether or not there exists another column with the same name in the tables being reported on (i.e., not being excluded).]

wrote Feb 13, 2013 at 8:54 PM