Skipping Transactions In SQL Server Transaction Replication
Jun 14, 2007
I'm trying to create a transaction replication from SQL Server 2000 to 2005. Basic replication between the servers works just fine. However, what I want to accomplish is to be able to skip some of the transactions. Example - from time to time we want to purge some of the historical data from the main database (the publisher). We don't want the same purging to occur on the destination database, which will be used for reporting purposes and needs to include all the historical information. I wanted to simply stop the replication log reader, purge the records, backup the transaction log with truncation and then restart the reader. The only problem - the truncation on the replicated database keeps the transactions of the purging until they are replicated, so the transaction log backup doesn't help. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
How do you skip just one record in transactional replication when you have an error?
I know we can add the -skiperror flag to the distribution agent to skip all errors (for a particular error number). But if we do that, can we get detailed information on every record that was skipped?
My goal is to be able to identify every row that cannot be replicated and has to be skipped.
I'm receiving the below error when trying to implement Execute SQL Task.
"The ROLLBACK TRANSACTION request has no corresponding BEGIN TRANSACTION." This error also happens on COMMIT as well and there is a preceding Execute SQL Task with BEGIN TRANSACTION tranname WITH MARK 'tran'
I know I can change the transaction option property from "supported" to "required" however I want to mark the transaction. I was copying the way Import/Export Wizard does it however I'm unable to figure out why it works and why mine doesn't work.
I'm investigating a poorly performing procedure that I have never seen before. The procedure sets the transaction isolation level, and I suspect it might be doing so incorrectly, but I can't be sure. I'm pasting a bastardized version of the proc below, with all the names changed and the SQL mucked up enough to get through the corporate web filters.
The transaction isolation level is set, but there is no explicit transaction. Am I right that there are two implicit transactions in this procedure and each of them uses snapshot isolation?
SET NOCOUNT ON; SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SNAPSHOT; DECLARE @l_some_type varchar(20), @some_type_code varchar(3), @error int, @error_msg varchar(50);
My client recently (well, the middle of January, anyway) attempted to restore their year-end backup to do some reporting, only to find that the backup file was corrupted and unrestorable. They do have earlier monthly backups, but they do not keep transaction log backups past those monthly backups (i.e. transaction log backups for November are discarded once the monthly full backup has been completed).
My question is this: is there any way to restore the month-end backup from January, then read the transaction log backups for the month of January to undo January's transactions?
This is a highly business-critical issue; they are going to be in a lot of hot water with the SEC if they can't produce the financials stored in the DB.
My client recently (well, the middle of January, anyway) attempted to restore their year-end backup to do some reporting, only to find that the backup file was corrupted and unrestorable. They do have earlier monthly backups, but they do not keep transaction log backups past those monthly backups (i.e. transaction log backups for November are discarded once the monthly full backup has been completed).
My question is this: is there any way to restore the month-end backup from January, then read the transaction log backups for the month of January to undo January's transactions?
This is a highly business-critical issue; they are going to be in a lot of hot water with the SEC if they can't produce the financials stored in the DB.
Taht is my code. I have a defined common transaction. In my call path, I use: using (IDbConnection connection = GetConnection ()) { retval = q.Find (connection, out DataParticleList); connection.Close (); } DetermineDataParticles ((DataParticle[]) DataParticleList.ToArray (typeof(DataParticle))); And then, in Determine DataParticles, I do: using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope (_Transaction)) { using (IDbConnection connection = GetConnection ()){ again. As both are using a TransactionScope that - uses the same transaction, and as the first connection has been closed - should the whole thing not reuse the same connection? GetConnection () has the same connection string. I get a promotion to DTC in the second GetConnection (). That indicates that a new connection is being opened (and attached), and not the first one being used. Any hint on why that is? What can I change for this? I would really like this not to be promoted upward to DTC. It makes no sense to me.
I have a requirement from the client that specifies to rollback every insert/update that happenned in the package if any task (control or data flow) fails.
I'm certain the SSIS package-level transactions take care of this, however, in this package, there is an OLE DB Transformation that executes a stored procedure which has a transaction in itself.
so to draw a quick picture... Package {
Transaction1 {
Data Flow {
OLE DB Transformation {
Stored Procedure {
Transaction2 { } } } } } }
Here's my question: What would happen if an error occured in the stored procedure (Transaction2)?
Does it behave like SQL Server 2005 where, given a scenario of nested transactions, the innermost transaction is comitted and the outermost transaction is rolled back?
I'm hoping that if the stored procedure decides to rollback Transaction 2 via error handling or if an SQL error occurs that I can rollback Transaction 2 and log an entry in the audit log.
I have a update trigger. In this trigger I need to insert few records in 3 tables. If error comes in any of these inserts then previous inserts to get committed. This trigger was written in Sybase and it was possible to create transaction and commit the transactions.
We are having a really big problem with a zombie process/transactionthat is blocking other processes. When looking at Lock/ProcessIDunder Current Activity I see a bunch of processes that are blocked byprocess 94 and process 94 is blocked by process -2. I assume -2 is azombie that has an open transaction. I cannot find this process tokill and it seems that this transaction is surviving databaserestarts. I know which table is locked up and when I run a select *from this table it never returns. Does anyone have any ideas as tohow to kill is transaction.Any help is appreciated.A. Tillman
We are implementing 2005 transaction replication on source database to target staging subscring database but we want to keep all transaction changes from source within staging subscribing tables. If source column gets updated we want to keep old record and new updated record in staging subscriber. Transaction replication synchronizes but does not keep history on subscriber. Do we update stored proc's anyone have examples of code or ideas??
Goofed up and ran an update query. It messed up all the data in a single table. I'm trying not to restore the table from a previous backup since the backup is more than 20 GB. It's going to take forever to restore it. Any advice would be much appreciated!
On SQL 7.0, NT SP6 we had transactional replication running fine last Friday. After a reboot (Fri night) replication continued fine and then by Tuesday am, we saw a lot of 'timeout errors' for the distributor agent and the difference in numbers of rows (count(*)) for same tables on each side grew alarmingly high even though the replication continued fine..
I have changed the timeout from '0' to '300' which seemed to help with timeouts, but the difference in row counts kept progressing slowly while the replication seemed to be running fine..
Eventually we resorted to re-intializing the subscriptions on the replicated database to get past the issue and now 24 hours later after intializing was complete, we are still pretty much in synch..
Any one have any ideas why we got so much out of synch (wrt row counts) .. ? Any bugs/ gotchas/ quirks any one can think of?
i have a publisher, a distributer and 3 subscribers all working. All created at the same time.
Today i have tried to introduce a 4 th subscriber server and replication has fallen over. Each cycle will have updates eg merged 75 data changes(6 inserts, 6 updates, 63 deletes, 48 resolved conflicts) but the next cycle will show: merged 55 data changes(4 inserts, 3 updates, 48 deletes, 37 resolved conflicts)
the 48 deletes are the conflicts from the previous cycle. this repeats hour on hour. The conflicts table is storing all of the changes but what have i done wrong in introducing the 4th server to get these symptoms? I followed the wizard all the way (may be that was it? :rolleyes: ) i have disabled this agent now and the others are working fine again. it is merge replication although the subscriber i have added is not going to be causing any updates.
I have configured a transactional replication between 2 MSSQL 2005 instances. It is set to replicate every 15 minutes. Most replications take less than a minute with about 10 - 50 transactions being replicated.
However, 3 times during the day, the replication takes about 25 minutes to complete with 500-700 transactions being replicated. This also causes the application that is accessing the DB being replicated to become unresponsive when it attempts to retrieve rows from tables in the DB.
Might there be a setting that causes the transactional replication to accumulate transactions during the day?
I'm trying to run an SSIS package. The package runs on an SQL 2005 server on Win2k3 server. The package tries to connect to another win2k3 server with sql 2000 to retrieve some data. However, I recieve the errormessage shown in the topic.
I found info about modifying the MSDTC security settings under "component services" and did so. I made sure everything was allowed. However, the result was the same. Does anyone have any other idéa about what could cause this problem?
PS. The package works fine if I set up both databases on the same physical machine...
Hi techiesI have set up a Transaction replication from My Primary Server toSecondary Server on Orders table.Thousand of records gets inserted on Orders every hour which getreplicated on the secondary server. it works finereporting apps uses Secondory server's Orders table data for generatingreports .The Problem :Let say if i want to Remove older records from Orders table in theprimary serverwith out reflecting this change on the secondary server.is there a way to PREVENT this operation /transaction to be propogatedto the secondary server.Note : i am moving the records to another table (orders_Archive ) anddeleteing the rows from orders table . Also I need all the rows to bepresent on the secondary server table.Please advice ASAPRegards,Raj
I am beginning design for a project to maintain an on-line archive of historical data for a production database, and then truncate old, rarely-used data from the production database. I am considering a method whereby we (A) replicate data changes from the production database to an archive database and (B) truncate old data from the production database according to predetermined business rules.
I am trying to determine whether SQL Server merge or transactional replication can be used to accomplish the replication portion of this requirement.
Given this scenario, there are two types of modifications that are made to the production database: (1) application inserts, deletes and updates which should be replicated, and (2) truncation deletes (as described in "B", above) which should not be replicated.
My question is: Will I be able to control the replication process such that application deletes are replicated, but "truncation" deletes are not? Could static row filters somehow be used to accomplish this?
I have a setup of transaction replication between one publisher and subscriber in the Same server.Now, I need to add a new subscriber to the existing publisher. So publisher database name is DB_A and Subscriber 1 name is DB_B. So the new subscriber will be DB_C. Is this kind of setup possible on one server?
If yes then at the time of reinitialization is it going to apply the snapshot on DB_B as well as DB_C?Also let say if due to disk error DB_B gets corrupted then will data be still replicated between DB_A and DB_C? (Assuming publisher, subscriber 1 and 2 are sitting on individual disks).
We have two SQL Server 2005 production DB at remote sites. Due to network bandwidth issue, we need to replicate these DBs (publishers and distributers) to central corporate SQL 2000 DB (subscriber for backup and possible reporting (and in rare case as a failover server).
We would start out with backup from SQL 2000 db restored on remote SQL 2005 DBs. When we have DB issue on remote 2005 DB, we want to restore it from central corp. 2000 DB backup. Since two DBs are replicating to central DB, we DO NOT want combined db back up data on restored remote 2005 db. We can restore the db and delete unwanted data before we turn on replication from this restored server. So, this is not a problem.
The real problem is how to avoid snapshot replication (during initialization) when we create a transaction replication on this restored server to avoid over writing data on the central subcriber sql 2000 DB???
There is a database "Foo" sitting on server "A". There is a database "Bar" sitting on server "B". A.Foo publishes a subset of its schema. B.Bar subscribes to A.Foo's publication. The distribution database is on "B" (B.distributor). This a push subscription (transactions are pushed to the subscriber from the distributor). Every day (including the weekend) I get the following alert:
"5/12/2015 3:53:16 AM, Unsubscribed Transactions (Count) on "B" is Warning.
SQL Server instance "B" has 636771 unsubscribed replication transactions received by the Distributor and not received by a Subscriber.
Unsubscribed Transactions (Count): Number of replication transactions received by the Distributor and not received by a Subscriber."
The number of transactions will vary. The alerts will be sent between 1:20 AM (EST) and 3:30 AM (EST). I'm trying to figure out what is causing the backup of transactions. I assume the issue precedes the alerts by 30-minutes or so.
There are no backups occurringNothing is blocking the distributor agent in the subscription databaseJob activity is at a minimum; the few jobs running run throughout the dayThe machine has plenty of resources -- CPU, RAM, etc.The publisher database shows no signs of stress.
Recently we disabled the transactional replication on a prodution database(data size:300GB) , two weeks later we were aware of the transaction log of that db almost reached the limitation (70GB).I investigated the issues and found:
1. open transactions pending for distribution:
DBCC opentran('xxxx')
Replicated Transaction Information:
Oldest distributed LSN : (0:0:0)
Oldest non-distributed LSN : (323830:7083:1)
DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your system administrator.
2. exec sp_replcounters, got over 240,000 replicated_transactions, which caused the tran log extremely large.
The transactional replication has been disabled on this server, there are no publication, distribution DBs any longer, all replication-related agents are also gone, why did this still happen???
3. use sp_repldone manaully reset those 240,000 transactions to distributed, check opentran, it was fine for a while. The tran log file was freed up 99% after that.
4. check open transactions and run sp_replcounters today, found the over 60000 transactions again on the db.
Did anybody experience the same issue and knows how to fix this issue and stop this happening ?
I have multiple questions and would appreciate any suggestions in resolving them. I'm a novice to these issues.
1) First of all, what is the exact command to setup the trunc. log on chkpt. option on for a transactional log of a SQL Server 2000 database? Is this option on by default? I have noticed for one of the databases I'm managing that the transaction log was over 12 GB, while the db was only 425 MB.
2) How's it possible to run a DBCC TRACEON to see the content of the transaction log to see if we are having any issues with any uncommitted transactions, i.e. updates, inserts, and/or deletes.
3) What are the commands to truncate inactive transactions and increasing the readbatchsize?
4) lastly, how do I validate transactional replication via checksum and find valid latency between a small number of changes that need to be committed between publisher and subscriber.
We have a filtered publisher (SQL Server 2012) with several pull and push subscriptions that have been functioning fine for years.
We have just added a new pull subscriber from a remote server. We configured an alternate folder location on the subscriber (pointing to existing path on a remote server). We generated new snapshot and partitioned snapshot, and moved to subscribing server at alternate path.We're seeing a problem we've never seen before:
When the merge agent runs, it applies the schema and performs a few hundred bulk inserts, but then proceeds to 'download changes to subscriber' as though the snapshot is old (it is brand new and should have all transactions). We have never seen this before, i.e. all data is usually applied in bulk when creating a new or reinitializing an existing subscriber.
we marked the subscriber for re-initialization (from both the publishing and subscribing server) with a fresh set of snapshots. The same problem occurred.We have also tried in our test environment (which mirrors production) and the snapshot applies as expected (via bulk inserts).
(It might be relevant to note the publisher was recently upgraded in-place from 2005 to 2012.)
Hi All I am using SQL 2000 on win 2003 server and I have been using the query analyzer and a stored procedure to add records to a particular table.
For some reason the ID column which is an identity column and is seeded to increment by 1, skips numbers every once in a while. I haven't used any deletes and there have been no errors when loading the info.
Has this happened to anyone else? Where do I start looking for possible causes
Iam extracting data from Excel to SQL Destination. In my excel file there are some null values rows are there, just want to skip those null and rest have to export to SQL server Destination. Anyonce can helpme in this.
Dear all, I set up a transaction replication (from server A to server B) for tables and stored procedures. When I update the data at server A, the data at server B will be updated by replication. However, the stored procedure can't update at server B no matter what I changed at server A's stored procedure. How can I update the stored procedure using transaction replication? The other question is the table schema. As I know, the transaction replication will be created a snapshot to project all needed tables and stored procedures at the first time. If I created a new table, stored procedure or changed the table schema (e.g. add/delete a new column), the transaction replication didn't update the new objects to the server B. What can I do to update the transaction replication except creating a new subscription?
