One item that several of my developers have mentioned as being in the “don’t like” category for TOAD schema and data compares is the following:
Dependencies are not handled gracefully.
A schema compare scenario:
View1 references view2. View1 is updated, and so is view2. I do a schema compare. View1, being earlier alphabetically, gets handled first. It fails, as view2 has not yet been updated. It seems like this could be handled more gracefully. The same is true for FK relationships added into tables.
Table1 has a new FK relationship added to it. It references Table2. Table2 is created at the same time. I do a schema compare. Table1 is brought over first, and the FK relationship fails, as Table2 doesn’t exist yet.
A data compare scenario:
Table1 has a FK relationship to Table2 (a lookup table, for instance). Table2 has some new data entered into it, and then some dependent values are entered into Table1. I do a data compare on the two tables. Table1’s values are put into the script ahead of Table2’s values, even though Table1 is dependent upon Table2 (via the FK relationship). It seems like the order of dependency for this scenario should be fairly easy to determine - which table has the FK relationship? More complex relationships might take more effort, but your digramming tool seems able to figure all the dependencies out just fine, so it might not be too bad. This work may already be pretty much done.
It would be great if v6 could handle these dependency scenarios more gracefully.