WingYip
asked on
Advice on replication
Ok
We have one server (server1) that hosts a website that backs on to a sql server database sitting on the same machine.
In the event of a machine failure, the website will failover to another server (server2). There is a sql server database that sits on this server as well.
We upload data to the sql server on server1 several times a week. At the moment if server1 is down (which it has been intermittently over the past 6 months) we stop uploading data untill server1 is back up again so that the databases dont get out of sync. Ideally, whichever server is up, we want to be able to continue uploading data and be sure that when the other server comes back, it will sync the dbs so that all data will be current.
We have used snapshot replication so far to keep the dbs on each server in sync but there seems to be an issue with snapshot rep when the db is being served off server2. So we plan to stop using it.
Does merge replication fit this scenario? Will merge rep automatically sync the dbs when a server comes back on line. If not is there a better suggestion?
Wing
We have one server (server1) that hosts a website that backs on to a sql server database sitting on the same machine.
In the event of a machine failure, the website will failover to another server (server2). There is a sql server database that sits on this server as well.
We upload data to the sql server on server1 several times a week. At the moment if server1 is down (which it has been intermittently over the past 6 months) we stop uploading data untill server1 is back up again so that the databases dont get out of sync. Ideally, whichever server is up, we want to be able to continue uploading data and be sure that when the other server comes back, it will sync the dbs so that all data will be current.
We have used snapshot replication so far to keep the dbs on each server in sync but there seems to be an issue with snapshot rep when the db is being served off server2. So we plan to stop using it.
Does merge replication fit this scenario? Will merge rep automatically sync the dbs when a server comes back on line. If not is there a better suggestion?
Wing
ASKER
Well we do need a 2 way street. But if 1 server is down we want to continue uploading to whichever server is working and then have it automatically sync when the other server comes back online.
Will merge work in that respect?
Wing
Will merge work in that respect?
Wing
Wing
My experience for the time being has been only one way.
When I say one way, I mean the main server holds the data, and it updates the other server as data changes
With a merge sync, any data that changes on either server will cause the other one to perform the change too.
My experience for the time being has been only one way.
When I say one way, I mean the main server holds the data, and it updates the other server as data changes
With a merge sync, any data that changes on either server will cause the other one to perform the change too.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
I am a HUGE fan of merge replication for similar senario's. It is admittedly an extra burdon on machines and networks (but I develop - the rest is for DBA's and SysAdmin's to worry about). To answer you questions specifically
>>"Does merge replication fit this scenario? "
Yes it does
>>"Will merge rep automatically sync the dbs when a server comes back on line. "
Yes it will (if you schedule it to do so)
>>"If not is there a better suggestion?"
I like merge replication, the other responder's like snapshot replication. Clearly you have trouble with snapshot replication, so why not try out merge, be careful and plan ahead, read everything you can get your hands on, ask every question that comes to mind and have fun
>>"Does merge replication fit this scenario? "
Yes it does
>>"Will merge rep automatically sync the dbs when a server comes back on line. "
Yes it will (if you schedule it to do so)
>>"If not is there a better suggestion?"
I like merge replication, the other responder's like snapshot replication. Clearly you have trouble with snapshot replication, so why not try out merge, be careful and plan ahead, read everything you can get your hands on, ask every question that comes to mind and have fun
andrewbleakley:
> other responder's like snapshot replication
Just a short clarification.
In my situation I do not NEED merge. (I only need to update remote servers with info on the HO server) It sounds like a great idea though!
My only doubt is that if you are having problems with snapshot replication, I do not think that just by changing to merge the problems will go away. It is not clear from your question what exactly the "issue with snapshot rep" is.
Dabas
> other responder's like snapshot replication
Just a short clarification.
In my situation I do not NEED merge. (I only need to update remote servers with info on the HO server) It sounds like a great idea though!
My only doubt is that if you are having problems with snapshot replication, I do not think that just by changing to merge the problems will go away. It is not clear from your question what exactly the "issue with snapshot rep" is.
Dabas
ASKER
Thanks to all. Kevin3nf pointed me in the right direction however.
Cheers
Wing
Cheers
Wing
I am quite happy with snapshot rep, and do not understand the problem you are having. Sync does stop if the subscriber is off line, but it quickly reestablished.
Merge rep will not solve your problem. It is used if you want to have a two way street.
Dabas