2-way txn replication

Hi,
I am trying to setup a 2-way txn replication from the source & destination
on SQL Server 2000 SP3.
is it possible to set up such replication (i.e 2-way) and how can i do that ?
tks & rdgs
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
Yes , its possible. I thinks its queue update method in txn replication
have a look at
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms151718.aspx
http://www.sqljunkies.com/Article/DA...2E6506A47.scuk
You can get better idea at replication news group.
Regards
Amish
|||Yes. Depends upon what you want to do.
You can use merge, transactional with immediate updating subscriber,
transactional with queued updating subscribers, or bi-directional
transactional replication. BOL has LOTS of information on setting each of
these up.
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"maxzsim via droptable.com" <u14644@.uwe> wrote in message
news:5998195cc01d6@.uwe...
> Hi,
> I am trying to setup a 2-way txn replication from the source & destination
> on SQL Server 2000 SP3.
> is it possible to set up such replication (i.e 2-way) and how can i do
> that ?
>
> tks & rdgs
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com

2-way txn replication

Hi,
I am trying to setup a 2-way txn replication from the source & destination
on SQL Server 2000 SP3.
is it possible to set up such replication (i.e 2-way) and how can i do that
?
tks & rdgs
Message posted via http://www.droptable.comYes , its possible. I thinks its queue update method in txn replication
have a look at
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms151718.aspx
http://www.sqljunkies.com/Article/D...82E6506A47.scuk
You can get better idea at replication news group.
Regards
Amish|||Yes. Depends upon what you want to do.
You can use merge, transactional with immediate updating subscriber,
transactional with queued updating subscribers, or bi-directional
transactional replication. BOL has LOTS of information on setting each of
these up.
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"maxzsim via droptable.com" <u14644@.uwe> wrote in message
news:5998195cc01d6@.uwe...
> Hi,
> I am trying to setup a 2-way txn replication from the source & destination
> on SQL Server 2000 SP3.
> is it possible to set up such replication (i.e 2-way) and how can i do
> that ?
>
> tks & rdgs
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com

2-way txn replication

Hi,
I am trying to setup a 2-way txn replication from the source & destination
on SQL Server 2000 SP3.
is it possible to set up such replication (i.e 2-way) and how can i do that ?
tks & rdgs
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.comYes , its possible. I thinks its queue update method in txn replication
have a look at
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms151718.aspx
http://www.sqljunkies.com/Article/DA7CCBA2-4FEF-43B8-AC77-AD82E6506A47.scuk
You can get better idea at replication news group.
Regards
Amish|||Yes. Depends upon what you want to do.
You can use merge, transactional with immediate updating subscriber,
transactional with queued updating subscribers, or bi-directional
transactional replication. BOL has LOTS of information on setting each of
these up.
--
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"maxzsim via SQLMonster.com" <u14644@.uwe> wrote in message
news:5998195cc01d6@.uwe...
> Hi,
> I am trying to setup a 2-way txn replication from the source & destination
> on SQL Server 2000 SP3.
> is it possible to set up such replication (i.e 2-way) and how can i do
> that ?
>
> tks & rdgs
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com

2-way replication through an outbound only firewall. Is this possible?

We have a client that would like to have their (Remote) web server
SQL2K instance set-up for 2-way replication against their internal
private SQL2K instance (Local). The problem is their network security
department won't allow *any* TCP/IP socket connections to be
initiated from the Remote SQL2K server through the firewall to their
internal Local server. However outbound connections, initiated from the
Local server (i.e. Local -> Firewall -> Remote), are allowed.
Can SQL Server support 2-way replication under this sort of firewall
restriction?
I imagine the Remote web server SQL2K instance would need to be
configured as the Publisher (listening on port 1433) and the Local
SQL2K instance a Subscriber. The Local Subscriber would then be
configured to connect periodically to the Publisher for updates. When
the Subscriber is connected all queued data deltas (on either server)
would be replicated between them to insure both instances are
synchronized. The Subscriber would then disconnect. (or not?)
Would the distributor process need to run on the Remote or Local
server? Would we need to run merge or transactional based replication?
More info:
- The network connection between servers should hardly
ever be down.
- Not all tables in the database schema need to be
replicated, just a subset.
- To begin with the tables will be empty on both servers,
so we don't need to worry about an initial snapshot.
- We hope to use SQL2K's Auto Identity Range Management
to ensure unique keys do not collide.
Thanks for any feedback you can offer.
Good to hear that it can work Markus,
Do you see any problems in running a very short period between data
merge pushes? Say every minute or even less?
Will SQL2K prevent a new merge from running if one is already in
progress?
-Paul

2-way Merge Replication(PDA<->SqlServer2000)

I am working on Windows mobile platform using C#. I am using Merge Replication to do synchronization between SQL Server2000 and SQL Server 2005 Mobile edition and t is working fine.

The Server Tables are copied in the Client DB. It works fine with one way, i.e., server pushing data to Client Database (in PDA), but when i tried to update from PDA database, server keeps over writting PDA databse.

The requirement is that before adding our PDA database as subscriber,there are some tables with same name and structure as in Server with some records. After that i added it as subscriber and sycnchronized.The tables in the server are going to overwrite the records in PDA. My requirement is to not overrite the records but it should update the existing table.

Is it possible....Can Any one Help meeeeeeeeeeeee plzzzzzzzzzz.

Move to Sql Server Compact Edition. Thanks!

Zero Dai - MSFT

|||You must move the initial data to the server tables, or add initial data in code on the PDA after the first sync.|||

Hi all,

Thanks for the reply and Sorry for the delay.I have a new problem that,I alredy mentioned you i am using Sql Server 2000 as publisher.....In that i alreay Configured one Databse as Publisher....it is working fine and now i want to use another database as a publisher in the same server........the problem is this time it is not asking for Snapshot location while publishing the Database

Once we mentioned it is sufficient or wat to do.........to get Snapshot.exe file........I am assumed that the previous snapshot is sufficient and synchronized bt giving DB name and publisher name...But it is giving Native error:29061.

Another thing i did was,I disabled the Database as Publisher and try to publish from the first.This time it is asking for snapshot location but in that location it is not creating any snapshot.exe.......and not even Snapshot folder.wat to do.plz help meeeeeeeeeeeeeee.......

Thanks And Regards

Ayyappa.k

2-way Merge Replication(PDA<->SqlServer2000)

I am working on Windows mobile platform using C#. I am using Merge Replication to do synchronization between SQL Server2000 and SQL Server 2005 Mobile edition and t is working fine.

The Server Tables are copied in the Client DB. It works fine with one way, i.e., server pushing data to Client Database (in PDA), but when i tried to update from PDA database, server keeps over writting PDA databse.

The requirement is that before adding our PDA database as subscriber,there are some tables with same name and structure as in Server with some records. After that i added it as subscriber and sycnchronized.The tables in the server are going to overwrite the records in PDA. My requirement is to not overrite the records but it should update the existing table.

Is it possible....Can Any one Help meeeeeeeeeeeee plzzzzzzzzzz.

Move to Sql Server Compact Edition. Thanks!

Zero Dai - MSFT

|||You must move the initial data to the server tables, or add initial data in code on the PDA after the first sync.|||

Hi all,

Thanks for the reply and Sorry for the delay.I have a new problem that,I alredy mentioned you i am using Sql Server 2000 as publisher.....In that i alreay Configured one Databse as Publisher....it is working fine and now i want to use another database as a publisher in the same server........the problem is this time it is not asking for Snapshot location while publishing the Database

Once we mentioned it is sufficient or wat to do.........to get Snapshot.exe file........I am assumed that the previous snapshot is sufficient and synchronized bt giving DB name and publisher name...But it is giving Native error:29061.

Another thing i did was,I disabled the Database as Publisher and try to publish from the first.This time it is asking for snapshot location but in that location it is not creating any snapshot.exe.......and not even Snapshot folder.wat to do.plz help meeeeeeeeeeeeeee.......

Thanks And Regards

Ayyappa.k

2q - Indexs and Optimize...

Mikael:
When people ask me this question (#1), I always say, look at the phone
book. You can think of a phone book as being like a 2-way composite
index on Lastname (Ascending) and Firstname (Ascending), in that order:
Adams, John
Bryant, Frank
Coolidge, Adam
Coolidge, Calvin
Coolidge, Zach
If you ordered it as Lastname (Ascending) and Firstname (Descending):
Adams, John
Bryant, Frank
Coolidge, Zach
Coolidge, Calvin
Coolidge, Adam
If you ordered it as First name (Ascending) ...
Coolidge, Adam
Coolidge, Calvin
Bryant, Frank
Adams, John
Coolidge, Zach
Get the idea?
MC wrote:
> As far as 1) goes theres a world of difference. I would suggest reading
> about indexes, if you have the time 'Inside Sql server 2000' would probably
> give you all the answers you need.
> 2) you can use Profiler tool. Trace queries and possibly filter them by
> duration value. If you put over 3000 you'll see only queries that last over
> 3 seconds...
>
> MC
> "Mikael Syska" <news01@.syska.dk> wrote in message
> news:OBZvoioXHHA.1388@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
"Mikael Syska" <news01@.syska.dk> wrote in message
news:eS7AKXsXHHA.3952@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Yes, I think so ...
> So an index on FirstName DESC, LastName ASC
> and the query ...
> SELECT Firname, LastName FROM t1 ORDER BY LastName, FirstName
> would are the list after that index ... ASC on FirstName and DESC on
> LastName ?
No, ASC on both. An ORDER BY is ASCending unless otherwise specified.
However, the query plans will be different.
Given this script:
create table order_test
( fname varchar(10),
lname varchar(10))
insert into order_test values ('albert', 'zilch')
insert into order_test values ('albert', 'allen')
insert into order_test values ('albert', 'Brend')
insert into order_test values ('Bill', 'zilch')
insert into order_test values ('Bill', 'Cramden')
insert into order_test values ('Wendy', 'Jillson')
create index fname_idx on order_test (fname asc, lname desc)
go
set showplan_all on
go
select * from order_test order by fname, lname
select * from order_test order by fname, lname desc
drop table order_test

Since we're ordering the results in "reverse" of the index, we have an extra
scan in there.
creating an INDEX with DESC is useful when you will generally return the
results in DESC order. It's just an optimization step.
select * from order_test order by fname, lname
|--Sort(ORDER BY[testing].[dbo].[order_test].[fname] ASC,
[testing].[dbo].[order_test].[lname] ASC))
|--Index Scan(OBJECT[testing].[dbo].[order_test].[fname_idx]))
select * from order_test order by fname, lname desc
|--Index Scan(OBJECT[testing].[dbo].[order_test].[fname_idx]), ORDERED
FORWARD)
[vbcol=seagreen]
> and if I had a other index on FirstName ASC and did a
> SELECT Firname, LastName FROM t1 ORDER BY FirstName
> it would sort DESC ... right ? if i guess they are grouped ...
> But are there any performance gain by doing it that way (then some columns
> would be added more than 1 time) ?
> best regrads
> Mikael Syska
> David Markle wrote:
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting
sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com