Permit nameless windows that do not need saving in SSMS - by Erland Sommarskog

Status : 


Sign in
to vote
ID 308372 Comments
Status Active Workarounds
Type Suggestion Repros 5
Opened 11/3/2007 11:01:00 AM
Access Restriction Public


99% of the query windows I have in SSMS or QA have throwaway contents. Theycontain various mixes of ad-hoc stuff, testing etc. For programming I use an external editor. The situation is the same for a DBA that might not even do much development at all, but only does monitoring.

With this use of SSMS, there is little reason of wanting to save a query window, 
and the question you get when you close SSMS is unwanted. This is particularly
obvious if you decied to reboot and go for a coffee in the meanwhile. When you
come back you find that Windows has not yet shut down, because SSMS wants 
to be told that you are not to save any windows. Or if you are a trainer, and want to shut down all machines in the classroom, SSMS gets in the way.

I've already file a request in this area,
but the response I'm getting is not very good. Apparently customer requirements are overshadowed by "guidelines".

But Paul Mestemaker inspired me to a suggestion that is better and that may
be easier to swallow for the guideline worshippers. However, since this is 
late in the cycle, I realise that this may be too much for Katmai, in which case
you would still need to implement item 124686 for Katmai. (After all, that is something that was in the 6.5 tools and in Query Analyzer for SQL 2000. Guidelines or not.)

Sign in to post a comment.
Posted by AaronBertrand on 6/24/2015 at 8:59 AM
Looks like this is being resolved with SSMS in SQL Server 2016 CTP 2.1, which has a new option to not prompt for saving unsaved windows. This was revealed in a SQL Server Release Services blog post that has temporarily been taken down but should be restored once all the links work.
Posted by Benjamin Marsili on 4/18/2014 at 8:50 AM
Simply scan the text for any SELECT INTO/INSERT/ALTER/DROP/DELETE/etc clauses, if there are just SELECTs let us close it without the annoying pop-up.

Coherence is not an excuse for bad UX. Fix it and provide updates quickly.
Posted by Starojitski on 12/27/2013 at 4:13 AM
This is probably the biggest annoyance i have every working day. Sometimes up to 50 times a day!

6 years is not enough?!

Come on people, wake up!
Posted by Clément on 8/19/2013 at 6:06 AM
Come on Microsoft ! Even BIOS have shortcuts to close without saving !
Posted by James D. Bailey on 2/7/2013 at 11:42 AM
Adding a simple option to suppress the save confirmation on close would be perfect!
Posted by ClaytonRodgers on 7/24/2012 at 12:06 PM
Hello Eric,

This would be a wonderful feature, is there an update on this issue?

Thank you!
Posted by Kevon on 5/2/2012 at 1:33 PM
Can I vote for this a million times?

Seriously... I right click a SPROC, hit modify, make my change, execute, and attempt to close. You're going to ask if I want to save my changes? I just did! I altered the SPROC.

What's the harm in adding a checkbox "Don't ask me this again"? Other products have this.
Posted by TechVsLife2 on 8/16/2011 at 12:05 PM
I'm a developer, and I would also welcome this change, or something in this direction. t-sql is not c#--one is not building a dll or exe from source files--and that's apart from the general need to use ssms to run select queries or make relatively small changes. Consistency has to be judged, like all things, by the general good; when two tools serve very different purposes or ends, then the interfaces may have to be inconsistent with one another in order to meet the higher consistency: consistency with the good that each tool serves. If you can be consistent in both senses, that's great, but that's not true here I think--at any rate, in such a case you should have options or a profile that allow the tool to function best for its main use.    

There have been a number of forum comments on this, but you may want to look at this thread in particular:

To save time, you may want to weigh suggestions by Sommarskog, Bertrand, Machanic, Ben-Gan, or other thoughtful, meticulous, and extensive contributors much more heavily than suggestions made by less well-informed or active users (including me, except for this one suggestion!)--not all votes are equal. of course, it's a complex product and you have grand overall plans or visions for it that you are moving on etc., so I wouldn't say much more than that suggestions made by "super-contributors" should get a lot of deference, doubly so if they are getting a large number of votes but even when they are not.

Posted by Erland Sommarskog on 5/12/2011 at 12:01 PM
This suggestion has attracted 20 votes. It's predecessor has attracted 49 votes, and the comments keeps coming in.

The fact that you close this as Won't Fix makes me wonder for whom you make SSMS. Developers are supposed to use Juneau, aren't they. Left are the DBAs, which may or may not work with files. For me the model that SSMS ofters is completely disconnected with the way I work. Query Analyzer offers the option to keep quiet about closing modified windows - one reason I keep using QA at work.

This is a core feature that you have refused to add to SQL 2005, SQL 2008 and SQL 2011. I spend 98% of my time in SSMS/QA in the Query Editor. There is also reason to work on improving that environment.
Posted by Microsoft on 11/7/2007 at 9:36 AM
Currently, I am looking into 2 possibiliites in SQL Sever 2008.

1. Implementing Scratchpad for quick scripting, executing and don't bother to save.
2. Enable an option setting that user can control the behavior of file saving when SSMS closes.

I will keep it posted.

Eric Kang