I am keen to hear peoples perspectives on how much additional load Transactional Replication will have on a server.
Obviously this will depend greatly on the level of transactions in the database, but a general indication would be great (eg 10% increase in overheads).
I am thinking of encorperating this into a new server structure which we are going to be setting up and am unsure as to whether to make the primary server BOTH the publisher and distributor; or make the secondary server the distributor to reduce the load on the primary to only being the publisher.
Basically the secondary server will simply be a 'hot swap' of the primary - so i/o load on the secondary is not going to be an issue.
There may be 2 primary's (if that makes sense) replicating to the hot swap so that if either primary is dropped the hot swap could take over either servers load/responsibilities - not sure if this will make a difference on where to put the roles?
I have sucessfully set up transactional replication, allowing the subscriber to update the publisher. All works well for a while, but after a couple of weeks or so it fails, but always for a different reason !
My question is, is there anything that can be done to help replication stay healthy. I had thought of doing regular backups of the database and the transaction log, and then truncating the transaction log.
Any advice, or links to other troubleshooting resource much appreciated.
I have just upgraded from 2000 to 2005 and my transactional replication is running very slow, I already have a latency of 10 mins and its getting worse. I'm just using the default agent profile, is there anything I need to change?
We previously having two servers A and B. Server A is used for updation of data and the data then replicated to server B. Server B is used for
Server A : purpose : used for database updation/ modification SQL Server version : SQL Server 2000 SP 2
Server Z : purpose : used for Reporting SQL Server version : SQL Server 2000 SP 2
We were doing Transactional replication from Server A to Server B.
Last month we have broght another server (Server B) with same hardware configuration but having SQL SERVER 2005 installed. This is to speed up our database update process. We have moved some of the database on this new server so that we can achieve our deadlines.
Server B : purpose : used for database updation/ modification SQL Server version : SQL Server 2005
I have set up the transactional replication from Server B to Server Z and replication works fine. However, the issue is after it is started replicating from this new server (Server B) performance of all the queries reduced a lot.(making my life harder)
I didnt expected this as our reporting server is still SQL server 2000. I have restored the backup of database which was replicated from server A (sql server 2000) and compared execution plan for one of our common query (which is used in most of the reports and which is now taking longer time to provide results)
I found that database which is replicated from Server B (Sql server 2005) is having primary keys. which was not present in the database which replicated from server A(Sql server 2000).
I have then removed the primary key and make the indexes same as previous copy of database(which was replicated from server A) But still the query takes long time.
Execution plan now shows "Table Spool" which was not present in previous copy of database.
Almost every query for this database is taking longer time now.
Can someone suggest me what is wrong and what should I need to fix.
I'm interested in combining the Peer-to-Peer Transactional Replication and Standard Transactional Replication to provide a scale out solution of SQL Server 2005. The condition is as follows:
We may have 10 SQL Server 2005 (1 Publisher + 9 Subscriber) running transactional replication in the production environment and allow updates in subscribers. To offload the loading of the publisher, we plan to have 2 Publisher (PubNode1 and PubNode2) using Peer-to-Peer Transaction Replication and the rest 8 subscribers will be divided into 2 groups. The subscribers 1-4 (SubNode1, SubNode2, SubNode3, and SubNode4) will be set to be standard transactional replication subscribers of PubNode1, and the rest 4 subscribers (SubNode5, ..., SubNode8) will be set to be standard transactional replication subscribers of PubNode2.
Is it possible to setup above 2 Publisher + 8 Subscriber topology? Also, could we set the 8 subscribers with updatable subscriptions to achieve each node is updatable?
We do not plan to set all the 10 nodes using Peer-to-Peer Transactional Replication as it is necessary to make sure n*(n-1)/2 (i.e. 45) peer-to-peer connections is reliable. It seems that the maintenance cost is high if the servers are not in a LAN and the topology is very high coupling. So we prefer to divide the 10 nodes into 2 groups and reduce the cost of each node to maintain the connections to all other sites.
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.
I have been researching on the proper steps or sequence to follow to completely remove SQL Server 2012 Transactional Replication. I have read articles about using SSMS as well as using replication stored procedures and some procedures use SQLCMD or just regular TSQL executed in SSMS. I have also read articles where people said all you really need is connect to the Publisher instance, find the publication you want to remove and choose "Delete" and everything will be taken care of behind the scene. I have three SQL servers that participate in transactional replication. SQL-P (publisher),
SQL-D (distributor) and SQL-S (subscriber). Do I need to connect to the distributor instance and the subscriber instance when removing transactional replication or is it just really connecting to the publisher and click delete on the publication? I want everything gone including any metadata, systems tables, distributions db and any other replication objects created during the initial configuration.
I am working on bringing our disaster recovery site to be a live site. Currently we replicate to one of out servers (server B) with merge replication (from server A). Server A also does one way transactional replication form some table to several other servers including servers at the DR site.
This setup is not going to be fast enough for what we need so I am wondering if a table is receiving merge replication will the merge updates also replicate down the transaction path??
Example... Server B update a row and merges to Server A. With this update them replicate (via transactional) to Server C??
On my distribution server there is a directory called mssql7 epldataunc that houses the bcp, sch and idx files for replications. A directory is created for each publication. Most directories are empty but some contain all the table idx, sch and bcp files for the publication. Some of these files are over 6 month. Does anyone know if these files are neccessary to keep and why do only some publications have these files. I am wondering if they are kept when you push the publicaiton and it errors out originally and you have to restart it? If any one can shed some like on this I would appreciate it.
Hi, I am planning to do a transactional replication from production server to reporting server. In one of my database is having 150 tables in it, only 100 tables are having primary key . Remaining tables are not have primary keys. So i am not able to do transactional replication for those 50 tables. Could any one tell me how i have to approch transactional replication. Because i need to have production data at my reporting server in regular interval. So pls suggest me . I am using Sql 7.0 with service pack2.
I have a problem with transactional replication in SQL Server 7. I have two databases (a publisher-distributor server and a suscriber server) and when I do an UPDATE in the publisher database the Log Agent Reader reads the UPDATE as an DELETE-INSERT and when the suscriber pull the suscription and try to do first the DELETE the transactional replication stops because of the Foreign Keys in the suscriptor database (that are the same as the publisher). If anybody knows how to solve it, please tell me
I have two servers networked via workgroups (no domain) and am trying to install Transactional Replication. Everything appears to install correctly, but when I run the initial Snapshot Agent I get the following error -
The process could not create file 'CONCEPCIONC$MSSQL7ReplDatauncCONCEPCION_Erik_Rep lication_Erik_Replication19991029153207Employer.sc h'. Access is denied.
The SQLAgent is starting with same user account on both machines - admin rights and the same password. I have added this user to the ( epldata) folder permissions as well. I even see a "Employer.sch" file in the directory.
I am planning to implement replication between two servers (either snapshot/transactional). Those two servers are physically connected but we don't have domain concept i.e we connected both servers physically and it can be pinked from each other, but not under any domain (not also under different domain). How should I register SQL server& agent services to start with 'Service startup Account'. In this case I cannot start both servers using same domain Account, they how can I relate...
Hi guys can anyone help me with this issue. if so thankyou kindly.
1. created transactional publication (for tables, stored procs & views ) 2. created empty database at subscriber 3. set up pull subscription at subscriber 4. ran the initial snapshot agent at the publisher 5. checked the schema files & found out it hadn't scripted the primary keys on the tables.
Problem: PRIMARY KEY AINT GOIN ACROSS, COULD ANYONE TELL ME IF IVE MISSED SOMETHING? THANK YOU MUCH APPRECIATED GUYS.
? Could it be that it is not picking up the primary keys on the tables because I am replicating stored procs and views with that publication?
? Should I break my publications into 3; say 1 for each object?
Hello all! I am setting up my first Replicated database, and want to get this right.
We are a Newspaper, and I will be Publishing the database that is the back end of the web server. The goal is to load balance the web site as well as to have a second identical server in case something goes wrong. Both the Subscriber and the Publisher need to be kept in sync as new articles are posted, so my client will just be updating the Publisher. But I'd like to keep a single set of usage statistics, so I was thinking of using Immediate Updating so the Subscriber can update the Publisher using two-phase commit.
What will happen if the Publisher shuts down and an update is attempted on the Subscriber? Will it just hang? Let's assume the worst - what if my Publisher is kaput? How do I determine that my other database is a Subscriber; and how do I stop it from being a Subscriber?
I have a requirement for pushing transactional publication to various subscribers. Each subscriber will need to receive a different subset of rows from a table. So I need all rows published, but with horizontal filtering at subscriber level. Is there a way of applying filtering at the subscription level.
I am using transactional replication between two SQL 2005 databases. On Sunday evenings, we run a maintenance plan that rebuilds the indexes on the publisher DB. When the plan runs, the replication receives errors and cannot continue. The error appears to be at the publisher level. The publisher runs continually and the subcriber runs every 10 minutes. The error states "cannot run sp_replcmds" Other than Sunday, everything runs fine.
I want to set up the transactional replication. How many service accounts we need and what kind of permissions it required in windows level?Only two servers we are using. Pub/Distributor and Subsciber.Which option is better Push or pull?
at the 'specify articles" on the wizard. Some tables have a key next to it that doesn't let me select them to be replicated. This is happens on transactional replication. But if i do a snapshot, the keys next to the tables are not there.
Need help guys... I'm new to SQL Replication, though I successfully created a transactional replication testing on my machine using PUBS DB and a separate DB.
I'm planning to establish/setup a Transactional Replication. There are two SQL Servers, one is being used by WebApp_1 and the other is being used by WebApp_2. Both servers are maintain by different administrators and situated on different domain/location (both used Win2003 Server). We will transfer some data from Server_1 to Server_2. Server_1 will be setup as Publisher and the other is the Subscriber, then additonalServer_3 will be added and will serve as the Distibutor.
My questions are:
1. Do I need to request separate domain account from the two different servers to establish connection to the Distributor?
2. Will the User databases from Publisher in compromise/affected as far as database settings and data are concerned?
I'm still pretty new when it comes to SQL server and I'd like to get some opinions about replication. I need to set up replication between 10 sites. The database is about 2 GB and at each size about 10 users are entering data. The databases need to be synchronized at least 3 times a day. Now our application developer told us to use transactional replication while I'm thinking of using merge replication.
Can anyone give me some more advice about the pro and cons of either replication type. TIA
We have 3 sites & would like to do replication btw the 3 sites. 1 publisher & 2 subscribers. All 3 sites should be able to do updates. Subscribers should be able to operate even if publisher is down. Any advice will be appreciated.
I have a small problem with the transactional replication when I run the initial snapshot and distributing some of the stored procedures. For eg., Say if the stored procedure has the following statements:
--------------------------------------- create procedure abc as declare @paytype varchar(50) set @paytype='check'
insert into acct select cusname,cusacctno,@paytype from cuspay ---------------------------------------
I get the following error: for statement:
set @paytype='check' -------------------- Invalid column name 'check'. (Source: ServerSQL1 (Data source); Error number: 207)
I tried changing to double quotes. even tried adding article using query analyzer without using EM
Does SQL Server 2000 (Enterprise Edition), mandate the creation of a GUID on each table used in transactional replication?
I was told that in addition to defining a Primary Key, I "MUST" also define a GUID on each table. As I recall - this is not true. Can someone who's setup Transactional Replication please field this question?
Hi This is my problem 1. I have been requested to implement either merge or transactional replication at my site.The replication will be over a wan 2. The problem i have encountered is that the tables have been denormalized to such an extent that they do not have primary keys ,this is because all the logic has been programmed into the application.I do not want to interfere with the table schema as this will create major problems in the application transactional replication requires that tables participating in this type of replication must have primary keys .IS THERE A WORK AROUND? 3. The second issue is that if i try to implement merge replication i am sitting with a problem that merge replication requires that all timestamp fields be removed to participate in merge replication.This application also has all the logic built into it.Almost all tables have the timestamp datatype in the rowstamp field. IS THERE A WORK AROUND FOR THIS PROBLEM
I am running sql 2000 sp3. A pull subscription failed with the following.
errormsg: Cannot drop the table 'table_name' because it is being used for replication.
errordetail: Cannot drop the table 'table_name' because it is being used for replication. (Source: SQLTEST2 (Data source); Error number: 3724)
This error started after a field was dropped and a new field added to one of the articles in the publication - changes were done through Enterprise Manager.
Why does this error come up. The Default Table Article Properties dialog box>>>Snapshot tab has the option "If a table with the same name as the destination table exists at the Subscriber>>>DROP the existing table and recreate it.
So if this is an option in replication for a Subscriber how come the error message says it cannot drop the table.
This is not so much a question as a warning/comment.
I was struggling to understand why the log file on my Merge Replication database was continuing to grow despite having a transaction log backup scheduled hourly.
I finally ran a DBCC OPENTRAN to see if there were open transactions and I got the following (to me, unusual) result:
When I googled for answers, everything kept coming back with pointers to SQL Transactional replication.
We were doing Merge Replication, so I didn't think the various links were relevant. But as I kept coming up empty for a solution to the issue, I finally went and had a look at the publisher properties and scanned down the list of replicated databases (there's just the one). Voila! The database in question was configured for both Transactional and Merge replication.
How it came to be configured for both Transactional and Merge replication, I do not know. I have a feeling it is somehow embedded in the publication creation script that I created some time ago. When I went to double check, I found the same option set on our Development and Test servers.
So, if you have a merge replication database and you find that you have a log file that is growing uncontrollably, check the publisher properties and look to see whether your database is enabled for transactional replication.
Guys, we have SQL Server 2005, transactional replication set up with pull subscriber. I need to add more tables to the existing publication. I have followed the steps to do it: added new articles to the publication. Checked the status of the Snapshot agent, ran the agent, but it didn't see any difference in the old and new publications. When I query sysobjects on the subscriber database, I see repl stored procedures related to the new tables that I would like to add to the subscription. Am I missing anything? Please, let me know what to do to modify the publication (to add more tables) and actually be able to see these tables on the subscriber db. I am new to the DBA work, so, please, forgive me if I am not making a lot of sense. Thanks,
