I.m trying to find the best practice for my solution.
This is the situation.
My application has two databases and 2 client interface. One with a windows forms having a database (sql server 2000) running in an office (on a static IP but on a slow connection). the second one is an web application running on the net with an online database. Both these databases have to have same information. Users can add records to both databases independently but these databases should be synchronize at a point. I hope the situation is cleare. Is there a standard way of doing this. If some one knows good article of how this can be done pls forward it to me.
I could use some sound advice regarding replication. (Or a better avenue to take if available)
I have a production server and a *live* server. 90% of the updates are done on my production server. When needed I update the live server by completing overwriting everything with the data on the local machine. (This is because there has been numerous changes to the database design as well as the data but this should no longer be the case.)
Now updates are taking place on both servers meaning they should both be identical.
The problem I see is that something like a snapshot or merge replication could never be done. Since the same id's can be created on both machines I see no way that the software can tell them apart.
So is it best to update one server and then send the request to the other to update the same record (or insert/delete etc) or is it better to use something like DTS or transactional replication to accomplish the same task?
I dunno, kinda in the dark at present but any advice on the subject would be very helpful.
We are developing a software for a logistic company, which will have around 1000 branches, and we need to synchronize the database(SQL Server) between all the branches using the database at web server, i.e the branches can get the new data from the web server,as well as push the data at the web server, please tell us how can we accomplish this task,
Our current environment is: SQL Server 2000 backend; XP/Windows 2000 clients with MSDE loaded; a Microsoft Access 2002 app using DSN to connect to the local MSDE database; Merge replication which is a job within the MSDE engine that we execute in VBA code using the following DMO code:
' Find the Job name to execute
lngJobCount = oServer.JobServer.Jobs.Count
lngJobIndex = 1
blFoundJob = False
While lngJobIndex <= lngJobCount And blFoundJob = False
If InStr(1, strJobName, "LEXData", vbTextCompare) > 0 Then
If InStr(1, strJobName, strServerName, vbTextCompare) Then
blFoundJob = True
End If
End If
lngJobIndex = lngJobIndex + 1
Wend
' Execute the job
If blFoundJib Then
Set oServer1 = New SQLDMO.SQLServer
With oServer1
.LoginSecure = True
.Connect strServerName
End With
Set oJob = oServer1.JobServer.Jobs(strJobName)
End If
We are now planning a move to a SQL Server 2005 backend and Express edition on the clients and the app would remain as Access 2002. Any pointers to documents that will be useful would be appreciated but I have a couple of specific questions as well.
1) As I understand it we can load Express side by side with MSDE so we will probably go down that path and load the data from MSDE into an Express version of the database. Once that's done we will create a DSN pointing to the new database and name it the same as the DSN which is currently used for the MSDE database. If we do this will our Access app simply work as before (ignoring replication)?
2) When we have our app happily running against a DSN that points to an Express database would we expect our existing DMO code (as above) to work, e.g. find a particular job in a list jobs and executes it? I can see that the replication job itself may have to be rejigged for Server 2005.
Hi,I recently contacted my hosting company's customer support about my databases not working - saying that I use sql express (which they support).The guy recommended: "I would suggest you to upgrade the db's to use mssql 2005." "This is because, sql express is built for development environment. When you are in development environment, you are accessing everything with administrator permission. However, in live hosting environment (when there are differnet kind of permission restrictions), sql express often failed on attaching database." Does anyone have any opinion on that? Would it be best to change db's to use mssql 2005? How complicated/time consuming will it be to upgrade?Thanks!Jon
I am thinking of doing a fake PC company site for my ASP project. so what they will have is a chat, products with reviews, and users can have "Buddies".So my DB so far (Tables):ProductPC - ID, Processor, RAM, HDD, Graphics, LCD ...ProductHardware - ID, Title (Like "Intel C2D E6600"), Description, Price, Rating (0-5 stars, so integer), Category (CPU, HDD, Graphics)ProductSoftware - ID, Title (eg. "Adobe CS3"), Description, Price, Rating, Category (eg. Design, Programming)Reviews - ID, ProductID, Title, Content, DateChat - ID, TopicID, Title, Content, DateUsers - ID, Username, Password,The problem, how do i connect Reviews to the products since they are from diff tables.How do i get the "buddy" system workingChat i think its not as simple as thatBut i just need a simple ASP project, so no need to get too complex, but i still hope to learn as much.
Hi,Apologies if this has already been asked, but I couldnt find a thread that asked exactly what I wanted.Im making an administration panel for a site where you can change various settings, options, and categories that data can fall into. When editing, adding or deleting a record i COULD make a trip to the database every time, but this feels very inefficient as I understand that establishing the connection is usually the biggest performance hit when querying a database.An alternative plan is for me to simply record the changes made in the panel and have a "save" button. When this is clicked, ONE database connection would be opened and all the data would be saved/updated/deleted as necessary. However, this would involve several "for" loops while the connection is open.The question is; which method would you recommend and why? And does having several "for" loops while the connection is open nullify the advantage gained by only opening one connection?Any advice would be very much appreciated. Thank you
Hello,I am working on a web site which will use SQL 2005.I am planing my first SQL database and I am looking for advice.1. There will be two types of users: students and professors.2. Both users types will have login information. (Username, Password, AccessLevel) 3. The remaining information on students and professores is different. Student (Name, Email, Phone, ...) / Professor (Name, Email, Phone, Subjects, ...)4. Professors can publish documents. Each document has some info (Type, Title, Description, ...)My plan in this moment is to:A. Create the tables Students, Professors, Login and Documents.B. Students table would be connected to Login table. Professors table would be connected to Login table and Documents table.C. The field [Type] in documents table should include the type or should I create a table DocumentsTypes where I add codes for each type. I have seen this. What is the advantage?Can someone give me some advice?Thank you Very Much,Miguel
I am creating a database where: - I have a Blogs and Folders system. - Use a common design so I can implement new systems in the future.
Users, Comments, Ratings, View, Tags and Categories are tables common to all systems, i.e., used by Posts and Files in Blogs and Folders.
- One Tag or Category can be associated to many Posts or Files. - One Comment, View or Rating should be only associated to one Post or one File. I am missing this ... (1)
Relations between a File / Folder and Comments / Ratings / View / Tags / Categories are done using FilesRatings, FoldersViews, etc.
I am using UniqueIdentifier as Primary Keys. I checked ASP.NET Membership tables, a few articles and few features in my project, such as renaming files with the GUID of their records. I didn't decided yet for INT or UNIQUEIDENTIFIER.
I am looking for some feedback on the design of my database. One thing I need to improve is mentioned in (1)
Thank You, Miguel
My Database Script:
-- Users ... create table dbo.Users ( UserID uniqueidentifier not null constraint PK_User primary key clustered, [Name] nvarchar(200) not null, Email nvarchar(200) null, UpdatedDate datetime not null )
I'm at a new installation where there's no DBA at all, so, as a Coldfusion programmer, I'm now the DBA, LOL.
The main SQL2000 DB we use is approximately 100MB with about 7MB of free space and is allocated to expand by 10%.
I am adding a new, large table, about 60 columns with lots of variable-length unicode fields, mostly nvarchar. It's being used to track non-USA user-form information. Even though the DB is set to expand, I'm concerned that due to the potential size/volume of records, that the auto-expand could cause performance issues.
The SQL2000 server has plenty of room, about 49GB, so I'm wondering if I should expand the size of the current DB, or if the auto-expand feature will be ok.
At this point I'm not sure what the volume of the user-form records will be in the new table. It won't be a million records certainly, but I'm guessing it could climb to maybe 10-20,000 records.
If I should expand the DB, can I do this while the DB is still online?
hi folks,i'm puzzled over this one, anyone with some solid db experience might beable to enlighten me here.i'm modelling a file system in a database as follows, and i can't figure outto cleanly implement an inheritance mechanism.i have a hierarchy of folders in an sql table. every folder has aparentFolderID, if this value is 0 then it means it's a root folder.then, in a 'files' table, every file has a parentFolderID to give it alocation in the structure. fairly basic.the hard part is that each file record has an attribute 'STYLE' that can beexplicitly specified, or inherited from it's parent folder, or it's parentsparent folder, or.. all the way back to the root.the 2 ways i've come up with representing it are:1) if the style is being inherited, enter a null value in the STYLE field.then to figure out what style applies to a file or folder, i trace backthrough it's parentFolderID records until i find a style attribute that isnot null.the good thing about this is that if i change the style that is applied tothe entire filesystem, it only takes one update.the bad thing is when i want to figure out what style applies to a file, ihave to traverse back through possibly several records to locate the folderthat actually specifies the style being inherited by the file.2) explicitly state all style values in each record.this is good for accessing the style of a file or folder because you get itstraight out first time from the db.the bad thing is if i update the entire file system, i might have severalhundred / thousand update sql statements to execute to update all the valuesin every folder and every file. nasty!thanks for any help, i'm really stumped with this and i'm thinking theremust be a more elegant way to implement inheritance.thankstim
I am creating a database where: - I have a Blogs and Folders system. - Use a common design so I can implement new systems in the future.
Users, Comments, Ratings, View, Tags and Categories are tables common to all systems, i.e., used by Posts and Files in Blogs and Folders.
- One Tag or Category can be associated to many Posts or Files. - One Comment, View or Rating should be only associated to one Post or one File. I am missing this ... (1)
Relations between a File / Folder and Comments / Ratings / View / Tags / Categories are done using FilesRatings, FoldersViews, etc.
I am using UniqueIdentifier as Primary Keys. I checked ASP.NET Membership tables, a few articles and few features in my project, such as renaming files with the GUID of their records. I didn't decided yet for INT or UNIQUEIDENTIFIER
I am looking for some feedback on the design of my database. One thing I think need to improve is mentioned in (1)
But any advices to improve it would be great.
Thank You, Miguel
My Database Script:
-- Users ... create table dbo.Users ( UserID uniqueidentifier not null constraint PK_User primary key clustered, [Name] nvarchar(200) not null, Email nvarchar(200) null, UpdatedDate datetime not null )
hi, iam thinking of changing my ajax slideshow so that it gets the data from the databse. currently i am finding it hard to add text functianlity the way i want with the slide show. what my query is, that if i to using a datalist can i add javasscript functionality to the data being retrived. for example, currently i have written some javascript so that a series of text is diplayed one after the other in a sequence from just one button click. so if im pulling data out of a databse can i still add this javascript functionality to it? i hope this makes sense, if it doesnt then i am willing to elaborate. please can any one offer any advice or examples or any suggestions on how i can do this. any help is much appricated as i am struggling to find a solution as i orinally wanted to be able to add this javascript functionality with the play button of the slide show but i couldnt find a solution.also i think its better to use some kind of database as i can use the editing funtions visual web developer offers thank you
Hi All Professionals Programmers, I would like to ask a question that is very important for me. The question is how can i create a flexible data base in which i m able to create the inner levels as much as i can. Like i have a table building, then i have another child table floor, then the floor become parent and i have its child rooms, then the rooms become parent and i have its child floor tiles etc. you can see i am going to inner dept, so i need a flexible database because its very costly and intimadting to change the database and every time create a new table and relationships. Hope you have understood what i am going to say and need advice of professional and expert user to resolve it. Any concise quality material like articles, white paper etc will also be suitable for me. Thanks in Advance
Have an interesting issue in a database I'm trying to design and I'm trying to find a better way to setup the structure, if there is one. Going to generic example of my issue.
StudentList --- This table is the list of all College Students(with Primary Key of StudentID) MajorsList --- This is a table listing all of the majors available at the College (PK of MajorID) CourseList --- This is the list of all of the courses at the school (PK of ClassID)
This college allows students to take 1 or more majors, with the number of majors unknown. -- Any number of students can take the same majors or different majors. -- -- (aka 1 StudentID -> 1+ Majors & 1 Major -> 1+ StudentID's) The majors all have different numbers of courses in them. -- Many of the majors can have the same, or different courses in their lists. -- -- (aka 1 Major -> 1+ Courses & 1 Course -> 1+ Majors)
I'm looking to see if their is a better way of tieing together the Students -> Majors and Majors -> Courses. If done properlly, a single select and a few joins should bring up every class a student is taking for all their majors, or any other relationship to any of the three main tables primary keys.
Currently, to tie the three tables together, I have made two Interrum tables: -- StudentMajors - - With only two columns -- -- StudentID (ForeignKey tied to PrimaryKey StudentID in StudentList) -- -- MajorID (FK tied to PrimaryKey MajorID in MajorList) and -- MajorCourses - - with only two columns
-- -- MajorID (FK tied to PrimaryKey MajorID in MajorList) -- -- CourseID (FK tied to PrimaryKey CourseID in CourseList)
These tables give clear and definate ties between the tables, but my worry is that there is no primary key for these two tables, and no column in the tables is elledgeable for becoming PK, because, in this example the StudentMajors table can lis tthe studentID multiple times, each with a different MajorID. Sames goes with MajorCourses.
Is there a better structure method for reaching this same goal?
Additional, I don't know how to do a contraint that should be in place of: -- In StudentMajors, for each value of studentID, there can be no duplicate values on MajorID -- -- (same in MajorCourses tables in relations to classid's) Any advice on how to do this constraint?
Hello, I have an asp.net application which connects to SQL Server 2005 database. One out of 15 times (approx) the applicaiton does not make connection to the database and an exception is thrown. I am not sure how to debug this. Should I write some code which can make connections in a loop to test how much stress the sever can handle? Kindly suggest some ideas. Thanks.
Dear GroupI'd be grateful if you can give me some advice on the following.An application I wrote uses an MSDE backend and I wonder whetherthere's a way (even for the system administrator) of not seeing ortracing stored procedure code, view and table designs?And I also wonder whether you can advise me on an installer thathandles MSDE and database setup during installation without too mucheffort but is still affordable < USD 1000.Any articles, resources, advice hints for these two topics are veryappreciated.Thank you very much for your help & efforts!Martin
Hi,I have transactional replication set up on on of our MS SQL 2000 (SP4)Std Edition database serverBecause of an unfortunate scenario, I had to restore one of thepublication databases. I scripted the replication module and droppedthe publication first. Then did a full restore.When I try to set up the replication thru the script, it created thepublication with the following error messageServer: Msg 2714, Level 16, State 5, Procedure SYNC_FCR ToGPRPTS_GL00100, Line 1There is already an object named 'SYNC_FCR To GPRPTS_GL00100' in thedatabase.It seems the previous replication has set up these system viewsSYNC_FCR To GPRPTS_GL00100. And I have tried dropping the replicationmodule again to see if it drops the views but it didn't.The replication fails with some wired error & complains about thisviews when I try to run the synch..I even tried running the sp_removedbreplication to drop thereplication module, but the views do not seem to disappear.My question is how do I remove these system views or how do I make thereplication work without using these views or create new views.. Whyis this creating those system views in the first place?I would appreciate if anyone can help me fix this issue. Please feelfree to let me know if any additional information or scripts needed.Thanks in advance..Regards,Aravin Rajendra.
In my production box is running on SQL7.0 with Merge replication and i want add one more table and i want add one more column existing replication table. Any body guide me how to add .This is very urgent Regards Don
I would like to create a database for keeping track of payroll data for employees where the supervisors (job coaches) on our workshop floor can use a Pocket PC device to record the hourly employee data on the fly. Then at the end of the day, the supervisor can place the device in a cradle of some sort and synch the newly entered data into the main database.
I'm guessing that SQL Server Compact edition would be perfect for this type of task? Is that correct? Can someone give me recommendations on how to go about setting this up? What should I use as the main database? SQL Server? Access? Any advice is appreciated!
I have database on localhost and i want to show this data on my website. I want to create a database online and want to sync with Local Host. Can it be possible syncing data automatically after some interval?
Hi, i was after some advice on moving a SQL Server 2000 database from one server to another.
Usually i would do this by backing up the database on the original server the copying it accross the LAN to the new server and restoring it there. This database is 10Gb in size and copying it accross the LAN will take some time and i would like to minimise downtime if possible. The database is at a customer site where i am not responsible for the network or Hardware.
We have a SQLSERVER database that is replicated to many users.We are currently in an expansion phase where we need to make changesto the server database. Each time we rollout a new release, we aredeleting the local replicating database and recreating.Is there any way to automatically transfer the changes from the serverto existing local database without deleting?
Trying to replicate database from a NT 4.0 server, SQL 7.0 SP2 to imilar machine on the same domain. When I use wizard following error occurs.
SQL server enterprise manager could not complete the wizard because @@servername for " is Null. Use sp_addserver to set @@servername.
Is this looking for a remote servername? What is the issue? Even if I use SP to add server name it complains about @@servername. The new name is added to the list of the remote server.
How do I replicate a database to a subscriber and extract the data from the tables that I don't want the subscriber to have. I know I can extract tables from replication but I need to extract fields within a table, that the subscriber cannot have.
I have a software that uses access database. this database is stored locally, thus, outside cant talk to it directly.
Now, i have a website hosted on a hosting company that runs microsoft sql 2000. I need to build a web application that will read some data from my local database and update it.
So, first thing comes to my mind is database replication. I have tried searching for helps, but couldnt find anything useful.
Can anyone tell me if replication of database from microsoft access to sql server 2000 can be done? Any help guides will be much appreciated.
To move my local database to a webserver is not an option.
I have one database(database1) in houston and the other database(database2) at Newjersy. SO if i wanted to replicate the data from the database1 to database2 how can I do that. I wanted to setup the replication to get the data into only one table. Infact both the tables are not identical in structure.
I'm a newbie so bare with me. If I have two servers running SQL Server, a primary and a secondary, how can I make sure that both databases (One on each server) are always syncronized? In our situation the secondary server is a hot backup in case the primary fails. If the primary fails then data gets written to the secondary. When the primary comes back up then its database needs to be synced with the secondary. Can anyone tell me how to do this?
When I create a suscription with the option "No, the Suscriber alreadyhas the schema and data", and I modify data, I have an error likethis:Could not find stored procedure 'sp_MSdel_ac_callejero'.(Source: SE110556 (Data source); Error number: 2812)How can I generate a replication restoring a backup, instead of make ansnapshop.Thanks in advance
Hi,Wondering if anyone can help. We have a knowledge base system which uses anMSSQL server to store information. The tool is web-based, and we have needto run reports on the information in the database, such as number and age ofarticles, for example.As the tool is used quite heavily, we can't afford the drop in performancethat reporting on the live database would cause, so we have setup anotherdatabase server which is to hold a copy of the database.We have a job set up in Enterprise Administrator which takes a backup of thedatabase from the live server every night and copies it over to thereporting server. A job on the reporting server then restores the copy fromthe live server over the top.However, the job on the reporting server consistently fails when it is run.It appears as though the database file on the reporting server is becomingunusable, however the copy remaining on the live server is fine.We are able to restore the database by manually copying over the file,however this takes up valuable DBA time that could be better usedelsewhere - has anyone else ever experienced anything like this, and if sohow did you get round it?The database backup file is around 3.5GB in size.Cheers,Andi
