Transactional Replication w/ Updatable Subscription - Replicate Execution of SP breaks replication
what doing wrong?
i have large table has multiple batch updates of > 100k records ea run, daily. table bidirectionally replicated (trans w/ upd sub) , causes other subscriptions behind while sends data. solution seems obvious, replicate execution of store procedure update vs replicating 100+k records every run.
however, problem causes msrepl_trans_version become out of sync between servers , future updates either not made or rolled primary server's values.
you can recreate creating table, setting bidi, create simple sp updates rows , replicating execution of simplesp.
* run simplesp on server (publisher), changes go server b (subscriber) - yay!
* run simplesp or direct update on server b new value , not replicate, instead old values server a!
or
* run update directly (not using sp) on server new value , not replicate
for sort of high volume updates should use native bi-directional transactional replication opposed updateable subscribers variant using.
updateable susbcriptions not scale. can't question though.
looking book on sql server 2008 administration? http://www.amazon.com/microsoft-server-2008-management-administration/dp/067233044x looking book on sql server 2008 full-text search? http://www.amazon.com/pro-full-text-search-server-2008/dp/1430215941
SQL Server > SQL Server Replication
Comments
Post a Comment