March 6, 2018 at 9:04 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor - Tuesday, March 6, 2018 8:02 AMddodge2 - Monday, March 5, 2018 3:06 PMSteve,Thanks for the feedback. One additional question if you wouldn't mind... I have, on one occasion, had to jury-rig an SSIS process due to an absence of Active Directory Services being installed. Any general observations in this area? I know there are several ways around this issue and a LOT depends on security needs. So, just curious to see what you, and maybe some of the others, might think.
Thank you,
Doug
Not sure what you mean here. Are you asking something in relation to security with SSIS or about having separate tools?
Ah, sorry. In the process of creating some sort of tool that would allow folks to 'decouple' what would be the most concerning from the point of security? The use case I had encountered got me thinking of various approaches and I didn't mention any of those as I was interested in the thinking of those more experienced than I would consider myself to be. However, one such approach might be something similar to the process you go through to register a CLR assembly. That sort of deal.
Thanks!
Doug
March 6, 2018 at 9:26 am
sknox - Monday, March 5, 2018 9:29 AMThe major reason bcp is high-speed is because it is focused on a specific pipeline between a specific set of potential input/output formats.
SSIS is what you want for more formats or a customized pipeline. In my experience, a well-designed SSIS package can be as efficient as bcp in terms of raw performance, while providing more complete error and performance logging.
Having said that, what I'd really like is a BCP native-format file source/destination for SSIS.
I'd like something considerably lighter than SSIS and entirely command line driven.
I like the way that the Linux world allows simple utilities to pipe their respective inputs/outputs together. Sometimes that is all that is needed.
To a certain extent you can do that with Powershell but whereas Linux has a sort utility, Powershell doesn't, or at least not without installing someone elses module
March 6, 2018 at 10:09 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor - Tuesday, March 6, 2018 8:03 AMChris Harshman - Monday, March 5, 2018 3:13 PMI had to install Management Studio on the server, because it has a server tool asinstancerename.exe bundled in it to rename an Analysis Services instance. When they stripped SSMS from the main SQL Server install set they took that with it, so when I went to look for it, it wasn't on my 2016 server.I get that, it's a decision where the tool goes, but still, no clients have network connectivity or this tool requires installation on the server? If it's the latter, then that's a poor business decision as we shouldn't require SSMS on a server.
The tool requires installation on the server. If I run the tool from my computer, it only finds the local Developer edition I have installed, and it doesn't give me any options to connect to a different server. SSMS was uninstalled afterwards, still annoying though.
March 6, 2018 at 4:06 pm
ddodge2 - Tuesday, March 6, 2018 9:04 AMAh, sorry. In the process of creating some sort of tool that would allow folks to 'decouple' what would be the most concerning from the point of security? The use case I had encountered got me thinking of various approaches and I didn't mention any of those as I was interested in the thinking of those more experienced than I would consider myself to be. However, one such approach might be something similar to the process you go through to register a CLR assembly. That sort of deal.Thanks!
Doug
There's probably something here. You should start another thread and discuss it.
March 13, 2018 at 7:16 am
I think it would be a mistake to exclude SQLCMD. It's pretty small and if you don't have SSMS installed and you need to run some SQL commands, it could be a life-saver.
Viewing 5 posts - 16 through 19 (of 19 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply