Bilateral Transactional Replication Problem

Hi,

I have 4 servers formed with bilateral transactional replication (each server is distributing, publicator and subscriber), the problem is that the transactionals processes to be failing in the application client as soon as the subscriptions is activate.

Please help me!!

dark.otakon@.gmail.com

What kind of errors do you have?

To set up bidirectional replication, you need to run on "loopback detection" at the publication level. And you can not have loops in the replication topology.

If you are using SQL Server 2005, you can consider peer to peer replication.

|||

I am using Sql Server 2000 with SP4, I am creating the subscriptions with the script:

exec sp_addsubscription @.publication = N'TRAFICO', @.article = N'all', @.subscriber = N'DCI-APP', @.destination_db = N'HHSITR', @.sync_type = N'none', @.update_mode = N'read only', @.offloadagent = 0, @.dts_package_location = N'distributor',@.loopback_detection = 'true'

The error is in the application client is "Cannot find the member name "Systema.Data.SqlClient.SqlError.""

Big replication

You might find this optimization article helpful:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../sql/2000/main
tain/mergperf.mspx
As you are using continuous merge, are you using merge
because of its versatile conflict management? If you
don't have conflicts and have no need for autonomy, I'd
consider transactional with updating subscribers if speed
is an issue.
Rgds,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
Thanks for link
Well I nead a conflict menager - clients can connect to any server as they
wish.
By the way some info:
to replicate 750 records 650 Bytes each to 6 SQL Server i nead (
approximately) :
- 23 seconds with 1024kbps,
- 143 seconds with 256kbps,
- 330 seconds with 128kbps
Best Regards
Wojciech Znaniecki
Uzytkownik "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:15c401c515df$a311f300$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> You might find this optimization article helpful:
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../sql/2000/main
> tain/mergperf.mspx
> As you are using continuous merge, are you using merge
> because of its versatile conflict management? If you
> don't have conflicts and have no need for autonomy, I'd
> consider transactional with updating subscribers if speed
> is an issue.
> Rgds,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>

Big Problem on Merge Replication

Hi, I'm working on a project taht involve SQLSever 2K and SQLSevre CE.
We have about 50 remote terminal that daily sincronize with one server but
each day something wrong happend.
The last one in order of time is this error
Error number 80004005
Native number 29006
Error descripcion: A call to SQL Server reconcilier failed. [,,,,,]
SSCE_M_SQLRECONCILIERFAILED
Followed by:
Source: Merge replication provider
Error number 80045063
Error descripcion: Failed to enumerate changes in the filtered articles
and then by this:
Source: srtv
Error number : 0
Native number: 0
Error descripcion: Call sp_MSsetupbelongs (?,?,?,?,?,0,?,?,1,?,?,?,?,?,?)
Usually at this time the only possibility is to delete the sdf database and
to resincronize the remote terminal.
I have already found an article in KB 328314 - FIX: Cannot Upload Null
Values in Sql_variant Data Type by Using SQL Server CE Merge Replication
but without possible solution and the strange thing is that I have no
Sql_variant Data on my Db.
Please help me because the project is at high risk of crash!!!
Thanx in advance
Best Regards
Gianluca Padovani
what happens if you restart your application that runs the merge pull?
Normally this will clear this error.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Gianluca Padovani" <Gianluca Padovani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:2F7758AC-A8C6-40B9-8EE1-3C2B0ACEBD1F@.microsoft.com...
> Hi, I'm working on a project taht involve SQLSever 2K and SQLSevre CE.
> We have about 50 remote terminal that daily sincronize with one server but
> each day something wrong happend.
> The last one in order of time is this error
> Error number 80004005
> Native number 29006
> Error descripcion: A call to SQL Server reconcilier failed. [,,,,,]
> SSCE_M_SQLRECONCILIERFAILED
> Followed by:
> Source: Merge replication provider
> Error number 80045063
> Error descripcion: Failed to enumerate changes in the filtered articles
> and then by this:
> Source: srtv
> Error number : 0
> Native number: 0
> Error descripcion: Call sp_MSsetupbelongs (?,?,?,?,?,0,?,?,1,?,?,?,?,?,?)
> Usually at this time the only possibility is to delete the sdf database
and
> to resincronize the remote terminal.
> I have already found an article in KB 328314 - FIX: Cannot Upload Null
> Values in Sql_variant Data Type by Using SQL Server CE Merge Replication
> but without possible solution and the strange thing is that I have no
> Sql_variant Data on my Db.
> Please help me because the project is at high risk of crash!!!
> Thanx in advance
> Best Regards
> Gianluca Padovani
|||Hi Hilary,
thanks for your help, I'm waiting for the response to your test request and
asap i'll give you the answer.
In the meanwhile I can tell you another thing. In My previous post I put the
PocjePC error but at the same time I have a corresponding one on SQLServer
Merge Agent.
The erorr is :
Last Command: {call sp_MSsetupbelongs(?,?,?,?,?,0,?,?,1,?,?,?,?,?,?)}
Failed to enumerate changes in the filtered articles.
(Source: Merge Replication Provider (Agent); Error number: -2147200925)
The merge process timed out while executing a query. Reconfigure the
QueryTimeout parameter and retry the operation.
(Source: srvtv (Data source); Error number: 0)
I made a quick search into the NG and I have found another couple of article
regarding this error.
I one of those article Paul Ibison suggest one FIX
(http://support.microsoft.com/?id=814916 ) to correct this error. May I use
it too?
Again thanks a lot for your help
Best Regards
Gianluca Padovani
|||Hi Hilary
I have got the confirm that if I reset the application and run it again the
error is cleared. This is a goal but is notthe solution because two session
of sincronization means an overhead of time not acceptable for our situation.
I hope in your answer about my previus message regarding the hotfix
Thanx again
Gianluca PAdovani
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> what happens if you restart your application that runs the merge pull?
> Normally this will clear this error.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>
> "Gianluca Padovani" <Gianluca Padovani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:2F7758AC-A8C6-40B9-8EE1-3C2B0ACEBD1F@.microsoft.com...
> and
>
>

Big problem

I have two databases that replicate with merge replication. A couple of days, the replication process failed while trying to do a re-initialization (with upload changes to publisher option enabled) and it seemed that some of the records in the subscriber
were missing. So I did a restore of the subscriber and then I then kicked off another re-initialization (with upload changes to publisher option enabled) and it has completed succesfully. However, now it seems that some of the older data that was created
in the subscriber are no longer in the subscriber but they are in the publisher. In addition to this, some of the records that were created in the subscriber did not upload to the publisher.
Is there any way to manually flag records to force them to replicate (for inserts)?
You could try doing a dummy update on the relevant rows (or all rows if necessary). Something like
Update MyTable set fname = fname
should do it.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
|||Yes, I tried this, but the problem is that I need to know which column has changed for each row. Is there any way to get it to replicate the whole row?
|||In your first post you explain that there are some rows on the publisher which don't exist on the subscriber and vice-versa. For some reason the merge triggers didn't fire and MSmerge_contents doesn't contain the the row value, so it is not replicated. Up
dating these rows - any column - will force an entry to this system table, and this should then be replicated. However your second post explains you need to know which column has changed for each row, which is what confuses me . Why is this required - d
o you also have rows which which exist on both publisher and subscriber but are not synchronized and contain different data?
Regards,
Paul Ibison
|||to force a row to be replicated again use sp_mergedummyupdate.
When the update is done on the other end SQL Server constructs the parameters for the stored procedure so that only the changed column is updated. So, it is stored somewhere. Figuring out where is not for mere mortals such as I - it is for the likes of su
ch as Mr. Ibison
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
|||Paul,
Yes, sorry, I was not clear in my first description of the problem. There are some instances where there is already a recod there but it is an older version, and there are some instances where the records are not there at all. I was mixing the two problem
s up.
Thank you (and Hilary) for your answers. they have been very helpfull.

Bidirectionnal replication between SQL 2000 and Sybase ASE

Hello,
For political reasons, I need to havec datas stored both on a SQL Server
2000 and a Sybase ASE v12.
If data changes in SQL, it must be replicated to the Sybase server, and if
data changes in Sybase, it must be propagated to the SQL Server.
Do you know how can I reach my goal in a simple manner ?
Thanks,
Steve
Does Sybase replicate to heterogeneous data sources (like SQL Server) using
stored procs? If so:
The best way to do this is to add a column to the tables you are replicating
called ServerName, or something like this. Then assign this column a default
of @.@.servername (I believe this option is available in Sybase).
Then modify update and delete the procs to do their work if the value of
servename being passed in the proc variable is not equal to the value in the
underlying column.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Steve B." <steve_beauge@.com.msn.Swap.dotcom.and.msn> wrote in message
news:41fa438e$0$2068$626a14ce@.news.free.fr...
> Hello,
> For political reasons, I need to havec datas stored both on a SQL Server
> 2000 and a Sybase ASE v12.
> If data changes in SQL, it must be replicated to the Sybase server, and if
> data changes in Sybase, it must be propagated to the SQL Server.
> Do you know how can I reach my goal in a simple manner ?
> Thanks,
> Steve
>

Bidirectionnal replication between SQL 2000 and Sybase ASE

Hello,
For political reasons, I need to havec datas stored both on a SQL Server
2000 and a Sybase ASE v12.
If data changes in SQL, it must be replicated to the Sybase server, and if
data changes in Sybase, it must be propagated to the SQL Server.
Do you know how can I reach my goal in a simple manner ?
Thanks,
SteveDoes Sybase replicate to heterogeneous data sources (like SQL Server) using
stored procs? If so:
The best way to do this is to add a column to the tables you are replicating
called ServerName, or something like this. Then assign this column a default
of @.@.servername (I believe this option is available in Sybase).
Then modify update and delete the procs to do their work if the value of
servename being passed in the proc variable is not equal to the value in the
underlying column.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Steve B." <steve_beauge@.com.msn.Swap.dotcom.and.msn> wrote in message
news:41fa438e$0$2068$626a14ce@.news.free.fr...
> Hello,
> For political reasons, I need to havec datas stored both on a SQL Server
> 2000 and a Sybase ASE v12.
> If data changes in SQL, it must be replicated to the Sybase server, and if
> data changes in Sybase, it must be propagated to the SQL Server.
> Do you know how can I reach my goal in a simple manner ?
> Thanks,
> Steve
>

Bidirectionnal replication between SQL 2000 and Sybase ASE

Hello,
For political reasons, I need to havec datas stored both on a SQL Server
2000 and a Sybase ASE v12.
If data changes in SQL, it must be replicated to the Sybase server, and if
data changes in Sybase, it must be propagated to the SQL Server.
Do you know how can I reach my goal in a simple manner ?
Thanks,
Steve
Does Sybase replicate to heterogeneous data sources (like SQL Server) using
stored procs? If so:
The best way to do this is to add a column to the tables you are replicating
called ServerName, or something like this. Then assign this column a default
of @.@.servername (I believe this option is available in Sybase).
Then modify update and delete the procs to do their work if the value of
servename being passed in the proc variable is not equal to the value in the
underlying column.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Steve B." <steve_beauge@.com.msn.Swap.dotcom.and.msn> wrote in message
news:41fa438e$0$2068$626a14ce@.news.free.fr...
> Hello,
> For political reasons, I need to havec datas stored both on a SQL Server
> 2000 and a Sybase ASE v12.
> If data changes in SQL, it must be replicated to the Sybase server, and if
> data changes in Sybase, it must be propagated to the SQL Server.
> Do you know how can I reach my goal in a simple manner ?
> Thanks,
> Steve
>

Bidirectionnal replication between SQL 2000 and Sybase ASE

Hello,
For political reasons, I need to havec datas stored both on a SQL Server
2000 and a Sybase ASE v12.
If data changes in SQL, it must be replicated to the Sybase server, and if
data changes in Sybase, it must be propagated to the SQL Server.
Do you know how can I reach my goal in a simple manner ?
Thanks,
SteveDoes Sybase replicate to heterogeneous data sources (like SQL Server) using
stored procs? If so:
The best way to do this is to add a column to the tables you are replicating
called ServerName, or something like this. Then assign this column a default
of @.@.servername (I believe this option is available in Sybase).
Then modify update and delete the procs to do their work if the value of
servename being passed in the proc variable is not equal to the value in the
underlying column.
--
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Steve B." <steve_beauge@.com.msn.Swap.dotcom.and.msn> wrote in message
news:41fa438e$0$2068$626a14ce@.news.free.fr...
> Hello,
> For political reasons, I need to havec datas stored both on a SQL Server
> 2000 and a Sybase ASE v12.
> If data changes in SQL, it must be replicated to the Sybase server, and if
> data changes in Sybase, it must be propagated to the SQL Server.
> Do you know how can I reach my goal in a simple manner ?
> Thanks,
> Steve
>

bidirectionnal connection fro merge replication?

Hello, I only need to know if I need to have a bidirectionnal connection between the subscriber and the publisher for merge replication or if the connection ca be openned only from the publisher to the subscriber if i use the push subscription option.
Thanks in advanceIn a push merge replication scenario you still need to ensure that there is a communication going when new transactions are posted on the subscriber(-s)'s side.

bi-directional vs updatable subscriptions

Bi-directional replication strictly speaking is where you have data
modification on any node moving to all nodes in a system, it includes merge
replication, bi-directional transactional replication, snapshot replication
with immediate updating, snapshot replication with queued updating,
transactional replication with
immediate updating, transactional replication with queued updating, and peer
to peer replication.
I am ignoring immediate updating with queued failover here.
Now, let me climb down from my soap box,
bi-directional transactional replication doesn't scale well to multiple
nodes, it locks you into a schema, but there are no schema modifications.
Immediate uses MSDTS (distributed transactions) which is not resilient to
network hicupps, and adds latency to all DML originating on the subscriber.
It adds a guid column to each table you are replicating, it is not really
scalable beyond 10 subscribers, and it will log conflicts but not allow you
to roll them back. It is best used when the majority of the DML originates
on the published. Queued updating uses a queue to replicate DML, it is not
scalable beyond 10 subscribers, adds a guid column to every table you are
replicating, adds latency to all DML originating on the subscriber, and is
best used when the majority of the DML originates on the publisher.
Conflicts are logged but cannot be rolled back.
Merge replication is designed for large numbers of subscribes, works well
when the majority of the DML originates on the publisher or subscriber, has
rich conflict logging and resolution, and adds a guid column to every table
you are replicating.
I use bi-directional replication in DR environments where it can work well,
keeping in mind there is no automatic failover and you are locked into a
schema.
HTH
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Rob" <Rob@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C060D84-80E7-4754-B1B0-6280E64ADDFE@.microsoft.com...
> What is the difference between Bi-directional and Updatable Subscriptions
> Transactional Replication? Conceptually, they seem to be the same... or
> are
> they?
No, most of it is experience
The caveats about where the majority of the DML occurs is documented. Have a
look at these links for more info.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa237486(SQL.80).aspx
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/aa237271(sql.80).aspx
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/aa237346(SQL.80).aspx
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-US/library/aa256086(SQL.80).aspx
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Rob" <Rob@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8E39CB8A-06F6-4318-A3A2-00948098CC07@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Wow! Thank you for taking the time to explain this so well.
> Just wondering on the some of the limitation that you had mentioned. For
> instance, "...not scalable beyond 10 subscribers"; "...locks you into a
> schema, but there are no schema modifications". Is that documented
> anywhere
> in BOL and/or on Microsoft's website where more info on those limitations
> are
> discussed in depth?
> Thanks again.
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:

Bi-Directional Transactional replication?

Has anyone successfully implemented Bi-Directional Transactional replication?
The documentation on BoL is very limited and there are not too many info
available outside too. We are planning to have active-active SQLServers, that
needs dynamic transactional replication.
I would really appreciate practical advise on BiDirectional Transactional
Replication?
Attention : Paul Ibison and JD . This is the same thread that I created
last month. I couldn't find a way to bump it up so that it becomes active
again. I did also change the subject a little bit, so that it is clear.
I have, it is pretty solid, but is not resilient to schema changes. Also
conflicts can be a pain, so the more you partition your data the easier life
will be for you.
"HowdyDowdy" <HowdyDowdy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:55B8E404-3560-4016-98E1-68EA35A35F79@.microsoft.com...
> Has anyone successfully implemented Bi-Directional Transactional
> replication?
> The documentation on BoL is very limited and there are not too many info
> available outside too. We are planning to have active-active SQLServers,
> that
> needs dynamic transactional replication.
> I would really appreciate practical advise on BiDirectional Transactional
> Replication?
> Attention : Paul Ibison and JD . This is the same thread that I created
> last month. I couldn't find a way to bump it up so that it becomes active
> again. I did also change the subject a little bit, so that it is clear.
|||HC,
Do you have the Bi-Di trans repl described in detail in your book? Are there
samples in there?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> I have, it is pretty solid, but is not resilient to schema changes. Also
> conflicts can be a pain, so the more you partition your data the easier life
> will be for you.
>
> "HowdyDowdy" <HowdyDowdy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:55B8E404-3560-4016-98E1-68EA35A35F79@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Yes, there are. There are some in the update BOL which are pretty good as
well.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"HowdyDowdy" <HowdyDowdy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:13B145A7-84DF-465F-B486-E780F4C9E9BB@.microsoft.com...
> HC,
> Do you have the Bi-Di trans repl described in detail in your book? Are
there[vbcol=seagreen]
> samples in there?
> Please let me know.
> Thanks,
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
life[vbcol=seagreen]
info[vbcol=seagreen]
SQLServers,[vbcol=seagreen]
Transactional[vbcol=seagreen]
created[vbcol=seagreen]
active[vbcol=seagreen]
clear.[vbcol=seagreen]
|||Thanks, Hillary.
I did see the udpated BOL and also an article from www.SqlMag.Com that
talked about BDT replication.
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> Yes, there are. There are some in the update BOL which are pretty good as
> well.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> "HowdyDowdy" <HowdyDowdy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:13B145A7-84DF-465F-B486-E780F4C9E9BB@.microsoft.com...
> there
> life
> info
> SQLServers,
> Transactional
> created
> active
> clear.
>
>

bi-directional transactional replication vs transactional replication with queued updating

Can someone help me understand the what the differences are between the
different types of bi-directional transactional replication, i.e
1) bi-directional transactional replication
2) transactional replication with queued updating,
Thanks
Bi-Directional replication is when a subscriber publishes back to the
publisher. You can only do this between two nodes, ie one publisher
subscriber pair. You need to partition carefully to minimize conflicts.
Queued updating using a queue (a SQL Server table or MSMQ). You can scale up
to about 10 clients - performance is not good after this. Queued updating
uses triggers on the subscriber and a tracking column.
HTH
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"William F. Kinsley" <bacardi@.noemail.nospam> wrote in message
news:OABBHP4aFHA.2860@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Can someone help me understand the what the differences are between the
> different types of bi-directional transactional replication, i.e
> 1) bi-directional transactional replication
> 2) transactional replication with queued updating,
> Thanks
>
>

Bidirectional transactional replication question

Hi,
I'm confused. I have bidirectional transactional
replication configured between 2 servers (sql server 2000
sp3). Same table is publisher and subscriber on both
servers.
Execution of:
sp_helpsubscription <publication name>
shows that loopback_detection is set to "No" on both
servers, and still, table changes are not being replicated
back, to the orginating server.
How is that posible? Is there any other way to prevent
changes to get back to the originating server?
Thanks,
OJ
It should be set to 1 or true for it to work.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"OJ" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0e5701c4a656$16a33710$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I'm confused. I have bidirectional transactional
> replication configured between 2 servers (sql server 2000
> sp3). Same table is publisher and subscriber on both
> servers.
> Execution of:
> sp_helpsubscription <publication name>
> shows that loopback_detection is set to "No" on both
> servers, and still, table changes are not being replicated
> back, to the orginating server.
> How is that posible? Is there any other way to prevent
> changes to get back to the originating server?
> Thanks,
> OJ

Bidirectional transactional replication and remote distributors

I want to be able to setup the following configuration using bidirectional transactional replication on SQL 2005

instance A lives on machine 1

instance B lives on machine 2

Instance A publishes to a transactional subscription on Instance B

Instance B does the reverse and publishes to a transactional subscription on Instance A

Instance A pushes to a distribution database on machine 2

Instance B pushes to a distribution database on machine 1

Problems Implementing Configuration

I can setup each instance as a distributor and create separate distribution databases using

sp_adddistributor and sp_adddistributiondb

I can then enable each publisher to use the correct distribution database using sp_adddistpublisher

However, when I try and run sp_replicationdboption to setup a database for publication, I get the error:

Msg 20028, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_MSpublishdb, Line 55

The Distributor has not been installed correctly. Could not enable database for publishing.

If I try and configure a publication with the wizard, it says that instance A must be enabled as a publisher before you can create a publication - and then presents the dialog to add instance A to be handled by the local distribution database - which I don't want.

It appears that I need to run sp_adddistributor on the publisher as well as the distributor for the appropriate instance, but if I do this I get the error:

Msg 14099, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_adddistributor, Line 109

The server 'instance A' is already defined as a Distributor.

It seems that you can't select a remote distributor if you already have a local distributor configured.

Is there a way round this limitation?

Note that configuring the environment with a single distribution database works fine

Try calling sp_adddistpublisher on machine 1 to add machine 2 as publisher and do the same on machine 2 to add machine 1 as publisher.

Regards,

Gary

|||Check out the new Peer-Peer replication in 2005 which does exactly what you want.|||

Gary - I have tried what you suggested and got the following error as per my original post

Msg 14099, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_adddistributor, Line 109

The server 'instance A' is already defined as a Distributor.

=====================

Dinakar - thanks for the suggestion - I have been checking out peer to peer, but I am not sure if I can live with the restrictions

=====================

I will probably go with a single distribution database located on the publisher with the lowest load. This should be satisfactory for the requirements

Thanks

aero1

Bi-Directional Transactional Replication - Problem

Two Servers,
1st 2nd
database a --> after replication a'
b' <-- after replication b
on 1st server a is replicated to 2nd
on 2nd server b is replicated to 1st
I tried with merge replication it is working fine.But if i tried to use
transactional replication it give some error like "access
violation".Using tansactional replication is it possible.plz help me to
slove this problem.
Regards,
Senthil prabu R
When you used sp_addsubscription, did you set @.loopback_detection=true?
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"senthilprabu" <senthilpraburaju@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125116841.951132.162370@.o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
> Two Servers,
> 1st 2nd
> database a --> after replication a'
> b' <-- after replication b
> on 1st server a is replicated to 2nd
> on 2nd server b is replicated to 1st
> I tried with merge replication it is working fine.But if i tried to use
> transactional replication it give some error like "access
> violation".Using tansactional replication is it possible.plz help me to
> slove this problem.
> Regards,
> Senthil prabu R
>

Bi-directional Transaction Replication

Besides loopback detection, is there anything else that is needed to prevent the replication command from sending back to the source. Cos i am having problem with the subscriber B sending back the replication to A in the form of B as the publisher and A as the subscriber.
:confused:hi
what is the problem? a error in the sync. Can you writr more information about your problema.

TIA
Abel.|||It gives me an error " violation of primary key constraint..." And when i search the record at the subscriber, it shows that the record is already there. Meaning A send to B...then B send to A...If I'm not wrong in reading about loopback detection, B shouldnt send to A already...correct me if I'm wrong. Tks.|||hi, you have a Transactional replication in a SQL Server? this type of replication not is a "bi-direccional" (by defualt, the data of subscriber be read only, do you can't modified this data), how implement this replication?
In your case use the merge, this type of replication is "bi-directional".

bye.
Abel.

Bi-directional Transaction Replication

Two Servers,

1st 2nd
database a ---> after replication a'
b' <--- after replication b

on 1st server a is replicated to 2nd
on 2nd server b is replicated to 1st

I tried with merge replication it is working fine.But if i tried to use
transactional replication it give some error like "access
violation".Using tansactional replication is it possible.plz help me to
slove this problem.

Regards,
Senthil prabu RI have no idea myself, but under "Nonpartitioned, Bidirectional,
Transactional Replication", Books Online says that to implement
bidirectional transactional replication "substantial customization and
programming is usually required."

So you might get a better response in
microsoft.public.sqlserver.replication, as it seems to be something
quite specialized.

Simon

bidirectional snapshot replication?

I currently have a list of users in a SQL 2005 database. Users are
authenticated based on their email address, and each user has a number
of areas they do and don't have access to. A website is used to add
users to the database, or to add area permissions for an exisiting
user.
I would like to set up a number of replicated servers around the world.
At least one would have very high latency and very low bandwidth to it.
All Sites are connected by VPN.
My question is: Is there a way to do bidirectional replication between
all of the servers? All servers would ideally be both publishers and
subscribers.. If so, which type of replication would you use? I was
thinking snapshot replication twice a day, but that may not make
sense..
Thanks in advance..
Have a look at peer-to-peer transactional replication - this sounds like
what you require.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com .

Bi-Directional replication without changing scema on subscriber

Hello - I am a newbie to Replication.
Can I setup Bi-Directional replication without introducing the guid column
on the subscriber? All the tables have Primary Keys.
Thanks.
-A
Adam - yes - columns are only added for updatable subsriptions and merge.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)

BiDirectional Replication

Has anyone successfully implemented Bi-Directional Transactional replication?
The documentation on BoL is very limited and there are not too many info
available outside too. We are planning to have active-active SQLServers, that
needs dynamic transactional replication.
I would really appreciate practical advise on BiDirectional Transactional
Repl.
This should help:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;820675
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...lsamp_3ve6.asp
Rgds,
Paul Ibison
|||Paul,
I did already find this info from BoL.
I am looking for someone who has done this already. I spoke to a few DBAs
who haven't heard of this, but they have implemented Transaction Repl before.
"Paul Ibison" wrote:

> This should help:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;820675
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...lsamp_3ve6.asp
> Rgds,
> Paul Ibison
>
>
|||This info is not in BOL - there are many setup scripts in the links I
posted. I have implemented it but didn't like the fact that I had to write
my own conflict resolvers and opted for merge instead, despite its overall
slower transfer rate (unless you are updating the same row many times I
would expect this to be generally the case). Also, schema changes will be
more restrictive. Hilary had implemented it in his work, so he can probably
add more if you want to go down this path.
Rgds,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Thanks, Paul. I do appreciate your time.
Hillary, Can you please shed some light on this?
PS : Paul : The updated BoL is available as a download contains the link
that you specified in your first response. I thought of providing this info,
so that people are aware of the availability of the updated BoL.
"Paul Ibison" wrote:

> This info is not in BOL - there are many setup scripts in the links I
> posted. I have implemented it but didn't like the fact that I had to write
> my own conflict resolvers and opted for merge instead, despite its overall
> slower transfer rate (unless you are updating the same row many times I
> would expect this to be generally the case). Also, schema changes will be
> more restrictive. Hilary had implemented it in his work, so he can probably
> add more if you want to go down this path.
> Rgds,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>
>
|||Well spotted - I'm using the old one at home. Thanks for the correction
Rgds,
Paul Ibison
"HowdyDowdy" <HowdyDowdy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A961EFBF-5E13-4178-902B-4C50F8972038@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks, Paul. I do appreciate your time.
> Hillary, Can you please shed some light on this?
> PS : Paul : The updated BoL is available as a download contains the link
> that you specified in your first response. I thought of providing this
info,[vbcol=seagreen]
> so that people are aware of the availability of the updated BoL.
>
> "Paul Ibison" wrote:
write[vbcol=seagreen]
overall[vbcol=seagreen]
be[vbcol=seagreen]
probably[vbcol=seagreen]