I know SQL Server 2008 can do this, but essentially I need a way to log all the changes made to a database. I don't need to log selects, and I don't need to log the user, the only important data is what has been added or changed, both with regard to data and structural changes like columns, tables, and indices.
What are my options?
I've used AutoAudit quite a bit, you simply apply it to whatever tables you wish to audit.
Main drawback is that it requires a single column PK. But most of my tables have surrogate identity PKs, so it's fine for that design philosophy.
Event Notifications can be deployed to monitor all schema changes at the database and even entire isntance level.
Global gata changes is not possible to monitor. You can select specific tables to monitor and deploy a trigger based monitoring. There are also low-impact log bassed solutions, but not out-of-the-box, they all need third party tools.
Related
I've created a database to track computers at my company. The goal is for the data to be automatically updated nightly and any changes tracked in a history table. I created a temporal table and everything seems to work fine. However, I'd like to exempt the column that contains the lastLogon from AD for each computer account. History of the data is irrelevant, it would result in many unnecessary updates to the history table and I'm concerned it would grow too quickly. Is there any way to do something like "Update the history table on changes to any column EXCEPT m_lastLogon"?
The only way you will be able to do this is to store the m_lastlogon information in a separate, non-temporal table. However, you are losing some potentially valuable logging information that way, especially for usage patterns and possible accidental damage tracking. You may choose to have a simple login log table correlated to the hardware, so that only the login information is tracked, reducing the unnecessary multiple recording of the rest of the information.
According to a comment made by Borko Novakovid (a Program Manager in the SQL Server team), you cannot exclude columns.
His comment was
Currently we do not support filtering out changes that occur on
columns one is not interested to track in DW schema (I guess that was
the question). We are aware that some people need this capability, but
modifying ETL logic to exclude these updates is also viable option...
Here's the link to the webpage
https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Data-Exposed/Temporal-in-SQL-Server-2016
I'm looking for an auditing solution that does exactly what Change Data Capture (CDC) does, except I need it to also track the application user that made the change. I'm currently using SQL Server 2012 Enterprise and may be upgrading to 2014 later this year.
We already have an auditing solution in place that leverages Delete, Insert, and Update triggers, but some new requirements might force us to update every audit trigger and corresponding audit table. Given various problems we've run in to with that solution over the years, this seems like as good a time as any to reevaluate and potentially replace the solution.
To give you an idea of what I'm currently working with (and may be able to leverage), we use a stored procedure (ConnectionInitialize) to store a user id with a SPID in a table (ApplicationUser) and then we delete the row using another stored procedure (ConnectionReset) once we're done making our deletes, inserts, and updates.
Were we to use CDC, I looked into adding a trigger to something like the cdc.lsn_time_mapping table, but I couldn't find a way to map the LSN back to the SPID (and therefore the user id) that was being used. This also presented some other issues in that CDC is always a little bit behind.
I looked into SQL Server Audit a little bit, but that presented some challenges of its own. We're using Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) to appease some of our security requirements, but SQL Server Audit looks like it'd need a separate encryption strategy; that and I'm more interested in the columns than in the actual SQL statements. Even so, these aren't deal-breakers for me, so I'm still looking into it.
Given what I'm trying to accomplish, does anyone have any feedback or recommendations?
By itself, CDC doesn't meet the requirements. The reason being is that CDC only grabs changes to your data, not any underlying context under which those changes were made. You can, however, get what you're looking for if you're willing to tag your data with some audit columns. The basic idea is that you append a column to your table (or to a different table if you aren't able to modify the actual table for whatever reason) and populate it with the user who last modified the record (pretty simple to do via an insert/update trigger). Once that is actual data, you can consume it however you need to (CDC being one possible mechanism).
Late answer but hopefully useful.
There is a third party tool, ApexSQL Audit, capable of meeting your requirements. My previous company is using it for years and they have been satisfied with it.
There is a helpful comparison article you can read to find more details about audited data, auditing mechanisms, integrity protection etc, for both CDC & Audit tool at one place.
I have a database with 50 tables and I want to log users requests, such as inserts, updates or deletes on all the tables in the database. I can also create a trigger for this for each request type.
What is the best way to do this from a performance perspective or is there a better way to track this?
You can also create audit tables which are populated by triggers (and which allow much more flexibility than change data capture). The critical component is to capture sets of data not try to work row-by-row. It does add some overhead yes, but if you write the triggers correctly, it isn't that much. Be sure to capture who (including which application if you have multiple applications hitting the database) and when as well as the old and new values. Set up one audit table per table you want audited (too much locking if you use only one audit table). And at the time you set up your system, write the code to get data back from a bad transaction or set of transactions. That makes it easier to recover when you do have something go wrong and you need to revert. We use two tables per table audited, one contains the info about the process that did the changes (name of the application, date, user, etc. and an auditid), the other contains the details about what was changed (old and new values, ID of the record being affected and column affected). Our structure enables us to use the same structure for each table being audited, and allows the tables to change without having to change the audit table and allows us to easily script the audit tables for a new tables. It is also easy for us to see what records were changed at the same time or in the same process or to find out which of the many applications which touch our database was responsible for the bad data as well as telling us who in particular was responsible for the bad data. This helps us track down application bugs and find out why the data was changed the way it was in some cases. It also makes it easier for us to track down all the data that was affected by a broken process rather than just the one we knew about.
If you have Enterprise Edition, look into Change Data Capture. If you don't have Enterprise and aren't interested in capturing the historical values of the columns that change, look into Change Tracking.
See Comparing Change Data Capture and Change Tracking to understand the differences between the two.
Assuming all requests to insert, update and/or delete data goes through some middle-tier data access layer, I would suggest you do your logging there. This is where we do all of ours. It is much simpler than trying to extract the actual insert / delete / update statements out of SQL Server.
If you want to do auditing of data, you can look into Change Data Capture (CDC). But this requires the Enterprise Edition.
We have a SQL server that has a database for each client, and we have hundreds of clients. So imagine the following: database001, database002, database003, ..., database999. We want to combine all of these databases into one database.
Our thoughts are to add a siteId column, 001, 002, 003, ..., 999.
We are exploring options to make this transition as smoothly as possible. And we would LOVE to hear any ideas you have. It's proving to be a VERY challenging problem.
I've heard of a technique that would create a view that would match and then filter.
Any ideas guys?
Create a client database id for each of the client databases. You will use this id to keep the data logically separated. This is the "site id" concept, but you can use a derived key (identity field) instead of manually creating these numbers. Create a table that has database name and id, with any other metadata you need.
The next step would be to create an SSIS package that gets the ID for the database in question and adds it to the tables that have to have their data separated out logically. You then can run that same package over each database with the lookup for ID for the database in question.
After you have a unique id for the data that is unique, and have imported the data, you will have to alter your apps to fit the new schema (actually before, or you are pretty much screwed).
If you want to do this in steps, you can create views or functions in the different "databases" so the old client can still hit the client's data, even though it has been moved. This step may not be necessary if you deploy with some downtime.
The method I propose is fairly flexible and can be applied to one client at a time, depending on your client application deployment methodology.
Why do you want to do that?
You can read about Multi-Tenant Data Architecture and also listen to SO #19 (around 40-50 min) about this design.
The "site-id" solution is what's done.
Another possibility that may not work out as well (but is still appealing) is multiple schemas within a single database. You can pull common tables into a "common" schema, and leave the customer-specific stuff in customer-specific schema. In some database products, however, the each schema is -- effectively -- a separate database. In other products (Oracle, DB2, for example) you can easily write queries that work in multiple schemas.
Also note that -- as an optimization -- you may not need to add siteId column to EVERY table.
Sometimes you have a "contains" relationship. It's a master-detail FK, often defined with a cascade delete so that detail cannot exist without the parent. In this case, the children don't need siteId because they don't have an independent existence.
Your first step will be to determine if these databases even have the same structure. Even if you think they do, you need to compare them to make sure they do. Chances are there will be some that are customized or missed an upgrade cycle or two.
Now depending on the number of clients and the number of records per client, your tables may get huge. Are you sure this will not create a performance problem? At any rate you may need to take a fresh look at indexing. You may need a much more powerful set of servers and may also need to partion by client anyway for performance.
Next, yes each table will need a site id of some sort. Further, depending on your design, you may have primary keys that are now no longer unique. You may need to redefine all primary keys to include the siteid. Always index this field when you add it.
Now all your queries, stored procs, views, udfs will need to be rewritten to ensure that the siteid is part of them. PAy particular attention to any dynamic SQL. Otherwise you could be showing client A's information to client B. Clients don't tend to like that. We brought a client from a separate database into the main application one time (when they decided they didn't still want to pay for a separate server). The developer missed just one place where client_id had to be added. Unfortunately, that sent emails to every client concerning this client's proprietary information and to make matters worse, it was a nightly process that ran in the middle of the night, so it wasn't known about until the next day. (the developer was very lucky not to get fired.) The point is be very very careful when you do this and test, test, test, and test some more. Make sure to test all automated behind the scenes stuff as well as the UI stuff.
what I was explaining in Florence towards the end of last year is if you had to keep the database names and the logical layer of the database the same for the application. In that case you'd do the following:
Collapse all the data into consolidated tables into one master, consolidated database (hereafter referred to as the consolidated DB).
Those tables would have to have an identifier like SiteID.
Create the new databases with the existing names.
Create views with the old table names which use row-level security to query the tables in the consolidated DB, but using the SiteID to filter.
Set up the databases for cross-database ownership chaining so that the service accounts can't "accidentally" query the base tables in the consolidated DB. Access must happen through the views or through stored procedures and other constructs that will enforce row-level security. Now, if it's the same service account for all sites, you can avoid the cross DB ownership chaining and assign the rights on the objects in the consolidated DB.
Rewrite the stored procedures to either handle the change (since they are now referring to views and they don't know to hit the base tables and include SiteID) or use InsteadOf Triggers on the views to intercept update requests and put the appropriate site specific information into the base tables.
If the data is large you could look at using a partioned view. This would simplify your access code as all you'd have to maintain is the view; however, if the data is not large, just add a column to identify the customer.
Depending on what the data is and your security requirements the threat of cross contamination may be a show stopper.
Assuming you have considered this and deem it "safe enough". You may need/want to create VIEWS or impose some other access control to prevent customers from seeing each-other's data.
IIRC a product called "Trusted Oracle" had the ability to partition data based on such a key (about the time Oracle 7 or 8 was out). The idea was that any given query would automagically have "and sourceKey = #userSecurityKey" (or some such) appended. The feature may have been rolled into later versions of the popular commercial product.
To expand on Gregory's answer, you can also make a parent ssis that calls the package doing the actual moving within a foreach loop container.
The parent package queries a config table and puts this in an object variable. The foreach loop then uses this recordset to pass variables to the package, such as your database name and any other details the package might need.
You table could list all of your client databases and have a flag to mark when you are ready to move them. This way you are not sitting around running the ssis package on 32,767 databases. I'm hooked on the foreach loop in ssis.
I would like to log changes made to all fields in a table to another table. This will be used to keep a history of all the changes made to that table (Your basic change log table).
What is the best way to do it in SQL Server 2005?
I am going to assume the logic will be placed in some Triggers.
What is a good way to loop through all the fields checking for a change without hard coding all the fields?
As you can see from my questions, example code would be veeery much appreciated.
I noticed SQL Server 2008 has a new feature called Change Data Capture (CDC). (Here is a nice Channel9 video on CDC). This is similar to what we are looking for except we are using SQL Server 2005, already have a Log Table layout in-place and are also logging the user that made the changes. I also find it hard to justify writing out the before and after image of the whole record when one field might change.
Our current log file structure in place has a column for the Field Name, Old Data, New Data.
Thanks in advance and have a nice day.
Updated 12/22/08: I did some more research and found these two answers on Live Search QnA
You can create a trigger to do this. See
How do I audit changes to sql server data.
You can use triggers to log the data changes into the log tables. You can also purchase Log Explorer from www.lumigent.com and use that to read the transaction log to see what user made the change. The database needs to be in full recovery for this option however.
Updated 12/23/08: I also wanted a clean way to compare what changed and this looked like the reverse of a PIVOT, which I found out in SQL is called UNPIVOT. I am now leaning towards a Trigger using UNPIVOT on the INSERTED and DELETED tables. I was curious if this was already done so I am going through a search on "unpivot deleted inserted".
Posting Using update function from an after trigger had some different ideas but I still believe UNPIVOT is going to be the route to go.
Quite late but hopefully it will be useful for other readers…
Below is a modification of my answer I posted last week on a similar topic.
Short answer is that there is no “right” solution that would fit all. It depends on the requirements and the system being audited.
Triggers
Advantages: relatively easy to implement, a lot of flexibility on what is audited and how is audit data stored because you have full control
Disadvantages: It gets messy when you have a lot of tables and even more triggers. Maintenance can get heavy unless there is some third party tool to help. Also, depending on the database it can cause a performance impact.
Creating audit triggers in SQL Server
Log changes to database table with trigger
CDC
Advantages: Very easy to implement, natively supported
Disadvantages: Only available in enterprise edition, not very robust – if you change the schema your data will be lost. I wouldn’t recommend this for keeping a long term audit trail
Reading transaction log
Advantages: all you need to do is to put the database in full recovery mode and all info will be stored in transaction log
Disadvantages: You need a third party log reader in order to read this effectively
Read the log file (*.LDF) in sql server 2008
SQL Server Transaction Log Explorer/Analyzer
Third party tools
I’ve worked with several auditing tools from ApexSQL but there are also good tools from Idera (compliance manager) and Krell software (omni audit)
ApexSQL Audit – Trigger based auditing tool. Generated and manages auditing triggers
ApexSQL Log – Allows auditing by reading transaction log
Under SQL '05 you actually don't need to use triggers. Just take a look at the OUTPUT clause. OUTPUT works with inserts, updates, and deletes.
For example:
INSERT INTO mytable(description, phone)
OUTPUT INSERTED.description, INSERTED.phone INTO #TempTable
VALUES('blah', '1231231234')
Then you can do whatever you want with the #TempTable, such as inserting those records into a logging table.
As a side note, this is an extremely easy way of capturing the value of an identity field.
You can use Log Rescue. It quite the same as Log Explorer, but it is free.
It can view history of each row in any tables with logging info of user, action and time.
And you can undo to any versions of row without set database to recovery mode.