# Using Liquibase without logging changesets

**URL:** <https://forum.liquibase.org/t/using-liquibase-without-logging-changesets/5957>\
**Category:** General Discussion\
**Created:** [September 24, 2021, 5:15am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/using-liquibase-without-logging-changesets/5957 "2021-09-24T05:15:35Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![redraoh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9fc348/32.png) [@redraoh](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/redraoh)\
**Post date:** [September 24, 2021, 5:15am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/using-liquibase-without-logging-changesets/5957/1 "2021-09-24T05:15:35Z")

</div>

Hello, we use Liquibase already in our pipelines to update schema etc. We have a requirement now to allow running any SQL against a database, every time.

My preference is to not touch the Liquibase tables, or even create them if Liquibase isn’t already being used to update schema of a database.

I know of the sql change type and using runAlways attribute, but I believe that will create the tables and track the changeset. Is there a way to avoid this?

The purpose of using Liquibase for this is as mentioned, we already have it in place for any project/team to consume in their pipelines. The other benefit is it abstracts from the underlying database, and we have Microsoft, Oracle, etc. databases.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![daryldoak](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.liquibase.org/daryldoak/32/764_2.png) [@daryldoak](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/daryldoak)\
**Post date:** [September 24, 2021, 12:19pm UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/using-liquibase-without-logging-changesets/5957/2 "2021-09-24T12:19:33Z")

</div>

I know there is an extension to not use the databasechangeloglock table, but I’ve never heard of a way to avoid using the databasechangelog table. @nvoxland might need to chime in on this one.