Re: operating systems
From: soc (zxc0_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 12/13/04
- Next message: Stephen Dybing [MSFT]: "Re: Can't view merge agent properties (trying again)"
- Previous message: Hank: "Does this authentication scheme work?"
- In reply to: Hilary Cotter: "Re: operating systems"
- Next in thread: Hilary Cotter: "Re: operating systems"
- Reply: Hilary Cotter: "Re: operating systems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:22:15 -0000
Thanks Hilary,
I will look into bi-directional tranasactional replication.
-Presumably it would make sense to use w2003 on both machines?
-Do the operating systems on 2 replicating machines have to be the
same?
Any advice would be appreciated.
Thanks SOC.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:O8z42MR4EHA.4092@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>I would not use merge for this - I would use bi-directional transactional
>replication. This is ideal because your data is highly partitioned.
>Transactions occur on only one side at a time.
>
> Transactional replication is in general much faster than merge
> replication. Transactional replication is designed for server to server
> replication - whereas merge is designed for clients who often go offline.
> Merge replication adds a GUID column to each table you are replicating.
> Transactional requires a primary key on each table.
>
> Merge replication can be more difficult to trouble shoot than
> transactional. Merge also requires (in general) more processing than
> transactional.
>
> This is not to say of course that merge is always less performant than
> transactional or slower than transactional. If you have a solution where
> there are heavy updates, the servers are not connected for significant
> lengths of time, and transactions originate on one server - merge is
> faster and performs better. Consider a stock market application where 1)
> the majority of the transactions are updates 2) the servers connect once a
> day 3) the transactions all occur on the publisher - in this case merge
> performs way better than tranny.
>
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> Now available for purchase at:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>
> "soc" <zxc0@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:eWfg9uQ4EHA.2404@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> Hello,
>> We aim to use the current server (w2k,sql2000ent, 2x1ghz, 1gb ram,
>> mirrored pair & raid 5 for data) as a failover machine and upgrade to a
>> new server for production.
>> The 2 machines will be in different countries. Users in both countries
>> will use the production server. If the connection between the countries
>> is broken, the remote users will use the failover.
>> We propose to have merge replication between the 2 machines (mainly one
>> way).
>> How can we estimate the physical physical size of data that would need to
>> be transferred to the failover m/c for a given time period?
>> Presumably it would make sense to use w2003 on both machines?
>> Do the operating systems on 2 merge replicating machines have to be the
>> same?
>> Any advice would be appreciated.
>> Thanks SOC.
>>
>>
>
>
- Next message: Stephen Dybing [MSFT]: "Re: Can't view merge agent properties (trying again)"
- Previous message: Hank: "Does this authentication scheme work?"
- In reply to: Hilary Cotter: "Re: operating systems"
- Next in thread: Hilary Cotter: "Re: operating systems"
- Reply: Hilary Cotter: "Re: operating systems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
