Re: SQL 2000 <-> SQL 2005
- From: "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 14:06:19 -0500
I would use bi-directional transactional replication for this as the latency
can be as low as seconds. Merge can be used but it requires schema changes
(adding of a GUID column), slows down each transaction (i.e. all inserts,
updated and deletes) are slower, and the latency is typically in the order
of minutes.
--
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Terry Mulvany" <terry.mulvany@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23YhJ03YOHHA.4260@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Group,
I have a situation where I need to sync data over a VPN (T-1 connectivity)
on a semi-realtime basis. This data is not highly dynamic, at most a few
thousand rows change per day.
I have SQL 2000 on one end and SQL 2005 on the other. Can 2000 and 2005
work together?
What is the best replication type for close to real time synchronization,
is it 'Merge'?
Can syncs be manually initialized in the prescribed type?
Thank you.
.
- References:
- SQL 2000 <-> SQL 2005
- From: Terry Mulvany
- SQL 2000 <-> SQL 2005
- Prev by Date: Re: This has to be easy...
- Next by Date: Re: This has to be easy...
- Previous by thread: Re: SQL 2000 <-> SQL 2005
- Next by thread: This has to be easy...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading