Monday Monitor Tips: SQL Auditing Preview

Posted on February 2, 2026 by way0utwest

One of the features we advocates have been advocating for is a better way to track security changes in your SQL Server instances. The first slice of this work is in preview (as of 12 Jan 2026) and this post looks at what’s available.

This is part of a series of posts on Redgate Monitor. Click to see the other posts.

Tracking Security Changes

The first iteration of tracking security changes queried instances and databases for information, stored it, and then compared it with other queries to determine what had changed. This was done hourly, and worked well, but it could not determine exactly when a change was made.

SQL Audit is made to capture this information in a lightweight way This works well, although the tooling (IMHO) is poor and hard to work with. Redgate Monitor is going to overlay this and make it easy for DBAs, InfoSec, and auditors to better understand what is happening in a SQL Server Environment.

There is a new tab in Redgate Monitor Enterprise Permissions page that contains this data. This is listed as “SQL Audit” and you can see this below.

2026-01_0105

Each row in here gives the time of the change, as detected by SQL Audit. If I expand the first column, I can see the details. In this case, we have a regular workload running to change these so that the demo site has data, hence you are likely to see the same data every day on monitor.red-gate.com.

2026-01_0233

The last column in the right has the command captured, with PII redacted, as you can see here. The reason you may see only the CREATE LOGIN items and not DROP LOGIN is this first slice of work is just getting the additions, so you can catch those hackers trying to add accounts.

2026-01_0234

The SQL Audit documentation page explains how this works, and keep checking this as there is a team enhancing these features on a regular basis and adding more events.

As with most of the pages in Redgate Monitor, you can filter and customize what data is displayed. You can also export your data as an csv file you can give to others. You have the option to get all data or just filtered data.

2026-01_0235

Summary

This post shows how a new preview feature in Redgate Monitor Enterprise uses SQL Audit to gather data on specific actions that are being taken on your SQL Server instances. This is a useful feature many customers have requested and it is being actively enhanced, so feedback is appreciated.

If you have feedback, please let us know as we value your opinions and comments on how we shape the future of Redgate Monitor.

Redgate Monitor is a world class monitoring solution for your database estate. Download a trial today and see how it can help you manage your estate more efficiently.

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Monday Monitor Tips: SQL Auditing Preview

There Are a Lot of Databases

Posted on January 30, 2026 by way0utwest

I was reading Andy Pavlo’s end-of-year review of the database world. He’s done this for a number of years, and there are links to previous recaps in the piece. He is an associate computer science professor at Carnegie Mellon University, working on quite a few database-related projects. In the review, he tends to track the database world from the perspective of business success and money. There are certainly parts of it that discuss technical changes, but my overall impression is more about the business and usage success than it is about the way database systems work.

The main thing that struck me after reading the review was how many database systems there are in the world. I hadn’t heard of any of these: RaptorDB, TigerData, Tembo, StormDB, Translattice, FerretDB, DocDB, SpiralDB, Tantivy, SkySQL, HeavyDB, and more. I’m sure I missed listing some I didn’t recognize, and quite a few of these are PostgreSQL-based systems, but still, that’s a lot of database systems that exist and are having success.

Last year, I ran into someone who worked at a company that had implemented ArangoDB for the software their company sold. This system had something to do with tracking parts and managing schematics for machines, which is a great place to use a graph database. I asked them why they didn’t pick a more well-known and used graph database like Neo4j. He answered that cost was a big reason, but if Arango failed to wrok, they felt could port their data over to another platform. He did mention that training new people was a challenge, which I believe is a good reason to stick with more mainstream systems. However, I understand that people placing bets on less well-known technologies is how the popularity of those platforms grows.

As a side note, I keep confusing ArangoDB with AvacadoDB. Maybe because I like guacamole.

If I look at DB-Engines, I see lots of platforms I recognize and a few I don’t, but overall this is a long list. Some you could argue aren’t really database platforms, but these are platforms people report they are using. There are 429 ranked, which is quite a few. I’m not sure there are that many different models of cars being produced in the US each year.

Many of these are specialized platforms and might be suitable or even preferred in certain situations. I wonder if any of you reading this are running Hazelcast or Presto. Or anything else unusual. If you are, why? What’s better about one of these systems than the top 5-10 in any category?

As I look around I realize there are so many databases available to choose from. Perhaps it’s just me, but I prefer choosing from a small list rather than a huge one. Do you feel the same way?

Steve Jones

Listen to the podcast at Libsyn, Spotify, or iTunes.

Note, podcasts are only available for a limited time online.

Posted in Editorial | Tagged | Comments Off on There Are a Lot of Databases

Advice I Like: Ranch Rules

Posted on January 30, 2026 by way0utwest

Leave a gate behind you the way you first found it. – from Excellent Advice for Living

This is a ranch rule. Leave something as you found it. If it’s wrong, then the person who left it that way is responsible.

We’ve had people try to help by moving something or changing something. I’ve done it as well, and had it done to me. Most of us know gates are supposed to be closed (or left open) most of the time, but we sometimes change something for a reason. Out front gate is usually open, but if it’s closed, I know it’s likely because a horse is out. No one should go through and leave it open with the thought someone forgot.

There are plenty of times when we might forget something, but our first instinct should be to put something back as we found it. Assume the last person had a reason for leaving it like that. If you have any doubts, go ask someone.

A good rule at the ranch,and a good one at work.

I’ve been posting New Words on Fridays from a book I was reading, however, a friend thought they were a little depressing. They should be as they are obscure sorrows. I like them because they make me think.

To counter-balance those, I’m adding in thoughts on advice, mostly from Kevin Kelley’s book. You can read all these posts under the advice tag.

Posted in Blog | Tagged , | Comments Off on Advice I Like: Ranch Rules

More Documentation is Needed

Posted on January 28, 2026 by way0utwest

AI is everywhere, and if you spend any amount of time looking for answers on the Internet to your coding challenges, you’ve likely encountered a lot of poor, average, good, bad, amazing, and just-helpful-enough AI content. For awhile, I was avoiding the AI summary from Google as the quality seemed slightly off, but lately it’s gotten good enough that I tend use it to decide which links to click on in the results. The summary helps me better understand the context Google sees in my search query.

I ran across a post on coding documentation and how helpful these docs are in onboarding, code reviews, and more. The teams that worked smoothly together often had good docs that helped them function as a cohesive group. At least to some extent. Over time, teams start to depend on tools and lose some of that cohesiveness since they rely more on tools than docs. I agree with the piece that this is a part of the reason many teams don’t really function as teams over time.

In the age of AI, this becomes more important. These AI agents are smart, but gullible and prone to making inconsistent decisions if you let them. In the piece, there’s a great quote: “When your codebase follows consistent patterns, AI assistants become force multipliers. When it doesn’t, they become chaos amplifiers.” Or as we data people know it, garbage in, garbage out.

The lack of documentation means a lack of guidance for both humans and AI agents. It’s easy to say AI makes crazy decisions when we feed it our code, but humans do the same thing. I can’t even begin to count the number of weird decisions over structure and naming I’ve seen from other humans when I didn’t provide them guidance. It happens even when I give them standards, but at least then we can have a conversation about attention to detail if there are docs.

I saw Brent’s predictions for AI database development in 2026, and part of the challenge in getting AI to be helpful is the lack of docs many of us have on schemas. I can’t tell you how often I’ve been asked if Redgate has tools that can doc a schema and decipher what data is being stored. Microsoft spent a billion+ on Purview, and its results in classification are a mixed bag. It’s a hard problem, and a lot of the problem is us. We don’t make good decisions about what to name columns or tables, we’re inconsistent, and we reuse columns as our requirements change, subtly altering the data being stored. Usually, this is an overloading of two types of similar, but different, data into one column. Sometimes it’s just storing whatever we want in a column (or allowing a user to do so).

I’d like to think that the growth of AI will result in a little more attention being paid to documenting our data stores. I’d hope this results in at least using the extended properties or COMMENT capabilities of the different platforms. I think having better ER diagrams might be a second step, though certainly with some AI assistance to help keep things in sync as we evolve our schemas.

Documentation is tedious work, and it’s not something humans are good at, or want to, update over time. However, if an AI agent were around to do the work and then let a human check the results, I suspect we might do a better job of keeping things up to date. To me, that’s another place where the AI revolution might benefit us all.

Steve Jones

Listen to the podcast at Libsyn, Spotify, or iTunes.

Note, podcasts are only available for a limited time online.

Posted in Editorial | Tagged | Comments Off on More Documentation is Needed