You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
✨ Feature Request: Output DacFx and Database Reference Versions Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I'm always frustrated when trying to troubleshoot database builds or deployments using dotnet build or sqlpackage, and I can't easily determine which version of DacFx or database references (e.g., master.dacpac) were actually used during the process. This makes it difficult to identify version mismatches across environments or diagnose issues with builds and deployments.
Describe the solution you'd like
I would like dotnet build (when building SDK-style .sqlproj) and sqlpackage (for deployment or script generation) to include the following in the standard output:
The version of Microsoft.SqlServer.DacFx being used (e.g., 170.0.94.3)
Possibly the version of Microsoft.Build.Sql
The versions of any referenced DACPACs (e.g., Microsoft.SqlServer.Dacpacs.Azure.Master v160.2.4)
This information could be printed by default or behind an optional verbosity flag (/v:normal or /v:detailed), and would dramatically improve traceability and troubleshooting.
Note sure how else to get this information open to suggestions
I would expect this to end up in one of the build artifacts but wasn't able to find it
Additional context
This would be especially helpful in DevOps pipelines or Fabric deployments where validation of toolchain versions is critical. It would also help differentiate between breaking changes caused by SDK upgrades versus other deployment logic.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
outputs the version however when you run a sqlpackage command such as
sqlpackage /Action:Script
There doesn't appear to be a way to determine the version that was called. This is probably a more minor issue. but useful as I struggled after I had updated sqlpackage (DacFx) locally. The script generated by the SQL project extension (via Publish → Generate Script) differed from the one produced by running sqlpackage from the command line. Being able to easily verify the DacFx version in use would have saved time and reduced confusion.
Perhaps, to be honest it's all a bit confusing to figure out how it all fits together and figure out if the issue is in the sqlproject extension, SqlPackage or build.sql or the underlying DacfX.. Every time I dig in it makes a bit more sense.
✨ Feature Request: Output DacFx and Database Reference Versions
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I'm always frustrated when trying to troubleshoot database builds or deployments using dotnet build or sqlpackage, and I can't easily determine which version of DacFx or database references (e.g., master.dacpac) were actually used during the process. This makes it difficult to identify version mismatches across environments or diagnose issues with builds and deployments.
Describe the solution you'd like
I would like dotnet build (when building SDK-style .sqlproj) and sqlpackage (for deployment or script generation) to include the following in the standard output:
The version of Microsoft.SqlServer.DacFx being used (e.g., 170.0.94.3)
Possibly the version of Microsoft.Build.Sql
The versions of any referenced DACPACs (e.g., Microsoft.SqlServer.Dacpacs.Azure.Master v160.2.4)
This information could be printed by default or behind an optional verbosity flag (/v:normal or /v:detailed), and would dramatically improve traceability and troubleshooting.
Example:
Describe alternatives you've considered
Note sure how else to get this information open to suggestions
I would expect this to end up in one of the build artifacts but wasn't able to find it
Additional context
This would be especially helpful in DevOps pipelines or Fabric deployments where validation of toolchain versions is critical. It would also help differentiate between breaking changes caused by SDK upgrades versus other deployment logic.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: