I have a sql 2005 publisher and distributor and a sql 2000 subscribers. for some reason on one of the subscribers i'm getting errors that it can't replicate the UDT's. i tried a new snapshot and made sure it was set not to replicate UDT's but i'm still getting Create Type errors.
would anyone have any idea why it's trying to create UDT's at the subscriber when i specify not to replicate UDT's?
if there is something wrong with the network link between publishing server and subscribing server,and will not be repaired in a few days ,what is the influence to immediate updating subscribers?????
View 1 Replies View RelatedHello all!
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have a database on SQL Sever 2005 SP1 against which a Publication has been defined and to which many servers (both Workgroup and Express editions - SP1) Subscribe to.
I would like to be able to distinguish between the Publisher and the Subscribers programmatically via T-SQL.
From reading BoL and various forums it appears that the IsPublished, IsMergePublished and IsSubscribed options of the DatabasePropertyEx function should give me this information.
However within all our tested environments, whilst the IsMergePublished option returns expected values. IsPublished and IsSubscribed both return 0 on all servers (the Publisher and Subscribers).
Is this a know issue and how can I rectify the problem or alternatively does anyone know of another method to distinguishing between the Publishers and Subscribers.
Thanks
Is it possible to replicate data from one publishers to a multiple subscribers in transaction replication? In other words I have Server A, Server B, Server C with databases A,B,C respectively. I need to replicate 10 articles from A to B but only 1 from A to C. In other words I want to use the same publisher but select one article from that publisher instead of all 10 to Server C/database C.
If it is possible what will be the drawbacks of such implementation? Will performance be a hit?
Hi,
I am Using Transactional Replication with Updatable Subscriptions. Is there any limitations in the number of subscribers (Servers) used for this type of replication?
I have a scenario of configuring this replication in 60 Subscribers(Servers). And the replication should be in the Continuous running mode. Will Transactional Replication with Updatable Subscriptions work in this scenario??? Or is it meant to work for less than 10 subscribers?
Please reply asap.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Swapna.B.
Hi,
I have a server in our central location which is a compressed snapshot publisher. I have 2 push subscribers in remote locations on very slow WAN links. I would like the snapshot cabinet file to be uncompressed at the subscribers location rather than the publisher location. Is this possible with push subscribers? I want to manage the pushing of data to the remote subscribers from the publisher location.
I understand the default with push subscriptions is to uncompress the cabinet file at the publisher location.
Thanks,
Mark.
Hi,
View 7 Replies View RelatedHi to all,
I have a merge (pull) replication between SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server Express clients.
Data synchronisation is ok, and I already made some schema changes (like adding new columns) at the publisher database which were applied to the subscriber as they should.
Now this doesn't work anymore. New columns added at the publisher (with ALTER TABLE or Management Studio) are no longer replicated to the subscribers.
I don't get any error messages, and I can't find any hints in the logs why this has stopped working.
The "Replicate_Schema_Changes" is still set to TRUE (in general, none of the publication options had been changed).
I tried sp_enumeratependingschemachanges to find out any "bad changes" put the sp returns nothing.
I remember that the last thing I did was adding a default constraint, which was replicated successfully to the subscribers.
Can anybody help?
Michael
I use merge replication and the topology is central publication. I have 20 subscribers.
when I run agent, I got message "No data needed to be merged". Publisher doesn't send data to this subscriber. When I update date again, I can send data to subscriber.
Why?!
How replication works?!
and How specifies records that must be send to the subscriber?!
Publisher and subscriber work with SQL 2000 with sp 3 installed on windows server 2003.
Please help me.
Thanks.
I am trying to figure out some scalability-related requirements for the project I'm working on, and unfortunately I cannot find out an answer to one of the questions by test-running, so I have to ask it in hope that someone has a definitive answer.
When two - or, more - different (distinct) users/subscribers
running the Report Manager from two different machines
[independently of each other] create their two subscriptions
with almost exactly the same parameters (same report name, same report rendering format, to be delivered via email at 6:00 AM every day, etc.),
and the only difference between those subscriptions is in email addresses (to whom the report shall be delivered)...
... when those subscriptions get executed at 6:00 AM,
are they executed only once (because those 2 subscriptions are the same except by whom they were created and to whom they should be delivered),
OR
is each of them executed separately?
In other words, if multiple users create absolutely the same subscriptions (except for a parameter to whom they should be delivered), how many times does the Report Server run that report?
Thank you very much.
When I try to open the subscribers tab in the publisher and distributor properties in SQL Enterprise Manager I get the following error:
SQL Enterprise Manager could not retrieve the list of registered subscribers.
Error 8152: String or binary data will be truncated
Anyone who has experienced similar problems or has a solution?
Best Regards
MF
We are running merge replication, SQL Server 2005 Enterprise with SQL Mobile 2005 (Windows Mobile 5) subscribers. Partitions are filtered on HOST_ID.
Ocassionally we experience a situation where a subscriber experiences an unusually long synchronization duration, and upon examining Replication Monitor, it appears that twice the number of rows, or X the number of rows (up to 7 times the number of rows) that should have been inserted are recorded as synchronized for the session: once the normal amount as inserts and once the normal amount as updates. This occurs for all tables in the subscription. This occurs on a first time synchronization to an empty subscriber database where there should be only inserts taking place.
I have examined the snapshot partition folders for these users on the file system and they appear to be identical in size and content as other subscribers. Checking the last partition snapshot job run and other characteristics for the the subscriber in question, everything appears to be the same as other subscribers functioning normally.
The HOST_ID for us is an employee ID used to filter employee specific data. I have seen this happen if the subscriber changes the value for the HOST_ID used in filtering, after the mobile database has already been populated (2 employees attempt to use the same mobile device and database). But, we have seen this happen recently where the HOST_ID was apparantly never changed midstream.
This just started happening recently. The only modification around the same time frame was the implementation of a custom business logic handler/custom conflict resolver that performs like "Latest Wins" but has logic added to update the a last-update datetime column for selected transaction tables at time of synchronization, so that an SSIS job can detect the changed rows for copying incremental database changes to another application database. This all seems to be working perfectly.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Matt
Hi:
Is there a limit on the number of subscribers for Transactional replication?. My question is how many maximum number of subscribers can we have in transactional replication?. How do I retrieve this information throug T-SQL (any DMVs or system tables?). Please let me know.
I am looking to know for both SQL 2005 as well as SQL 2000 and also if anyone can tell me if anything has changed in SQL 2005 for transactional replication that would be great.
Can anyone please let me know?.
Thank you
AK
Hi All,
We are developing a system which will have to support more than 3000
subscribers. We will have to support both Transactional replication
and Merge replication.
I checked the following document about SQL 2005 replication <http://
www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/mergrepl.mspx>. The
document does not clearly specify what is the maximum number of
subscribers supported without a significant performance degradation.
The questions i have are:
1. Given the fact that there will be more than 3000 subscribers, there
will be more than 500-1000 subscribers trying to replicate at the same
time. Will be there be a performance degradtion in such a scenario
2. Has anyone used SQL Server 2005 in a scenario involving more than
3000 subscribers?
3. Will it be better if we develop our own system to perform
replication activity instead of relying on SQL Server 2005?
- Ngm
Mail me atnarasimha (DOT) gm (AT) gmail (DOT) com )
I need a way to push create index statements drop to the subscribers. If I can use replication to distribute index creation that would be great. We don't allow our clients to make any schema changes directly. We are using transaction and merge replication.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI implemented a merge replication publication on a SQL Server 2005
View 6 Replies View RelatedHi ,
I am trying to create Replication Topology (Merge Replication) like below.
Subscriber1 --> Publisher <-- Subscriber2.
I have created both subscribers with Subscription Type as Server with Priority as 75. I am updating the Column A of Row_10 in Subscriber1 on time say 11 am. After i am running the Starting synchronizing agent from Subscriber1. The value propagated to Publisher now publisher contains the latest value in Column A. Uptonow the Subscriber2 is not synchronized with Publisher.
Now in Subscriber2 also Column A of Row_10 is updated say at 11.10 am. Actually now Publisher contains the value from Subscriber1 for that Column and in Subscriber2 we have the same column updated.
Now i am running the Synchronization in Subscriber2, i am getting the result which is not expected. Here Publisher's value is propagated to Subscriber2. But as per real scenario Subscriber2 has the Latest value which is updated on 11.10 AM.
I don't know what am i missing here. Actually merge replication should see the time stamp and it has to decide winner. But here it always considers publisher as a winner and puts the data to Subscriber.
Can anyone help ?
Thanks in advance
I previously asked What does "Do not replicate DELETE statements" do? to make sure I was correct on my thinking of what "Do not replicate DELETE statements" does. And after finding out it does what I would like it to do, create an archive db, I've tried several testing scenarios to see if it would work. So far I have been unable to not replicate delete statements. I'm not sure if I'm not setting a property right or what and any guidance would be appreciated.
Here is what I've done.
Created a blank db to be used as a subscriber and created a test db with some random data in a table.
Setup a New Publication on the db with the random data as "Transactional Publication"
Selected the following articles and properties in the publication
Tables
DELETE Delivery Format = Do not replicate DELETE statements
Views
Default Values
Stored Procedures
Default Values
User Functions
Default Values
Selected the default options for the rest of the New Publication Wizard steps and clicked finish.
Created a Pull Subscription on the new publication that I just created.
Let it initialize.
Then did a select count(*) query on the test table on the publication (18k+ rows) and subscriber (18k+ rows)
Then did a delete t-sql from the test table on the publication.
Then did a select count(*) query on the test table on the publication (0 rows) and subscriber (0 rows).
Now shouldn't it not delete the records on the subscription db?
Hi,
I read the BOL on how the publisher will had out identity ranges to subscribers, but it was not clear if this was also the case for anonymous subscribers. Will merge replication with identity columns work with anonymous subscribers that sync via HTTPS?
Thanks,
Darrell Young
Replicate ddl setting is not working if multiple subscribers are used...
View 2 Replies View RelatedAs I am begininng to believe that is the only edition I am going to be able to run on my Vista Utlimate os.
Standard does not install server components.
I believe SQL Express was working as installed with Visual Studio 2005, but I need the use the tools that SQL Express does not contain.
Thanks,
_Greg
Hi,
I am trying to replicate some tables from an Sql Server database to an Oracle database. So the publisher is SQL Server and the Subscriber is Oracle.
Unfortunately I realised that I can't set the replicate_ddl parameter to 1 for an Oracle Subscriber. This is the error I got:
"The property "replicate_ddl" cannot be modified for publications that are enabled for non-SQL Server subscriptions."
I looked on the Internet and I found that this parameter "@replicate_ddl" (used in the add_publication stored procedure) can't be set to 1 if the @enabled_for_het_sub parameter is set to 'true'.
So I thought if I just set the replicate_ddl parameter to 1 and leave the other parameter to false and then use the sp_changepublisher stored procedure to set the enabled_for_het_sub parameter to true that will work. But it didn't. I tried this in Enterprise Manager and although I had no error I realised that the replicate_ddl parameter was reset to false.
Is there any way I can replicate the ddl statements in Oracle automatically or I should to them manually?
I need to merge replicate data to two different types of subscribers:
Clients subscribers which will have a very small percentage of the data from the central database. The data on these machines will be managed using dynamic filtering on host_name()
Server subscribers which will manage a copy of all the data from the central database
There will be far fewer server subscribers than client subscribers.
As I see it I have two options for the configuration
1) Use two separate merge publications one which is filtered and one which isnt
2) Use a single merge publication and setup the filtering so that the server subscribers receive all the rows
Which option is likely to lead to better performance?
With option 1) there would be 2 complete sets of replication metadata which need to be maintained so I am tending towards option 2. Are there any disadvantages in using a dynamic filter to return a very large number of rows?
Hello,
I have set up a merge replication with 4 subscribers and a publisher on SS05 sp2 on 5 window servers. After running my application on the replication with big data for a while, the data in some of tables of subscriber are out of sync from the publisher. I tried to run sp_resyncmergesubscription to fix the problem according to http://doc.ddart.net/mssql/sql2000/html/replsql/replmon_9pwh.htm. The procedure run successfully. However, the problem is still exist.
Does anyone else have this problem. Please help!
Sql Server 2000
I am looking for bidirectional transactional replication using updatable subscribers (queued or immediate) . Is it possible to replicate the image data from the updatable subscribers to the publisher. I understood that the Image data can't be replicated to the publisher from the updatable subscriber. I am not using the WRITETEXT or UPDATETEXT. I am using just INSERT and UPDATE for image data type transactions.
Any thoughts on this is greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance
I posted a more detailed technical question a couple of weeks ago
with Subject = "Compact Edition 2005 Subscribers - Merge Agent failed after detecting that retention-based cleanup has deleted metadata"
But I got no replies.
Now my question is simpler: Is SQL Server 2005 Merge Replication reliable with Compact Edition subscribers on WindowsXP tablets?
We deleted all users' local databases a couple of weeks ago, and republished two publications with retention = 60 days.
Now we have at least one user who can't sync with the server, and replication monitor shows the error below.
But if she e-mails her sdf file to a support person, they can successfully sync her database.
We're sure that it's not a permissions issue, which is a normal suspicion when one user can perform a task that another can not.
It doesn't seem like a retention problem, because she's well inside the retention period.
She can successfully sync with the publication with upload/download tablers, but not with the publication with download only tables. Both publications were created on the same day, by the same DBA, with nearly identical properties.
This problem user has operated in the past with no problem, and she's configured identically to all of the others. It just seems like random flakyness with merge replication for Compact Edition subscribers.
I feel stupid saying that, because it sounds like I believe in a magical ghost in the machine. So my question is - IS MERGE REPLICATION A LITTLE BIT FLAKY FOR COMPACT EDITION SUBSCRIBERS ON XP MACHINES?
We've applied SP2 to the server, but no subsequent HotFixes.
We're trying to sell users and management on developing a larger occasionally connected system with the same replication scheme, so we need to know if it deserves our confidence.
Error messages:
The Merge Agent failed after detecting that retention-based metadata cleanup has deleted metadata at the Publisher for changes not yet sent to the Subscriber. You must reinitialize the subscription (without upload). (Source: MSSQL_REPL, Error number: MSSQL_REPL-2147199402)
Get help: http://help/MSSQL_REPL-2147199402
I need to replicate from a SQL 7.0 server to SQL 6.5 server.
Has anyone done it, or does anyone know if it can be done?
Thanks in advance
Joe Gentile
Hi gang,
I'm 99% sure this is possible, but I wanted to confirm before I go upgrading one box in our replication scheme without having to do all the others (which are geographically dispersed):
Can an SP2 box replicate (merge replication in our case) with pre-SP2 servers? Most of our servers don't even have SP1 applied, and we're ready to upgrade, but I want to be sure I can do them one at a time rather than all at once.
Cheers,
Matt
Can we replicate views in SQL 2000 or SQL 7.0 ? If yes please let us know How
Thanks
We are performing snapshot replications from one server to another, however the permissions are not being taken across.
When we manually reset them, the next replication will quite happily remove all permissions.
Any help appreciated.
Peter
I am trying to create an auto off-site backup of an entire database. This would include databases and users. It should also include changes made throughout the day.
Something challenging about this is I want it to also include design changes that may have been done throughout the day.
I understand log shipping or replication can deal with the data part of my solution. But how can I copy over the logins, users, and design changes?
Is it possible to have design changes replicated from publishers to subscribers?
I am using Sql2000 and have 6 servers. On this 6 servers 4 servers have the same database
MY QUESTION is i need a script or advice that will help to do this:
Every time data chages in 1 of the 4 servers that have the same database, I want all changes to happen in the other 3 so that they must always have the same information