Prev: SQL 2005 transaction repl verbose logging location
Next: murge process could not clean up the subscription
From: Paul Ibison on 16 Feb 2007 10:51
This sounds ok. If you run:
EXEC dbo.sp_MSdistribution_cleanup @min_distretention = 0,
@max_distretention = 72
in QA, what happens?
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com




From: Hilary Cotter on 16 Feb 2007 21:58
It is, you should be able to safely delete anything longer than the
retention period.

--
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



"jimbo" <crutch(a)newsgroups.nospam> wrote in message
news:FC2F0CA0-EC84-4B29-86C2-F4F87C558464(a)microsoft.com...
> How would I confirm this? A lot of the transaction dates pre-date my
> inheritance of these databases by more than a year. Isn't the clean up
> agent
> supposed to take care of these?
> Thanks!
>
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
>
>> If you know they have been already distributed to all of the subscribers
>> you
>> can go into this table and remove them in a simple delete statement.
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> "jimbo" <crutch(a)newsgroups.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:1794737B-8EE3-45E3-948B-5FE5E0578559(a)microsoft.com...
>> > On a SQL 2005 distributor we are seeing very high I/O levels and high
>> > cpu
>> > when the distribution clean up job runs. The MSrepl_commands table has
>> > some
>> > 8+ million rows. The MSrepl_transactions table has very old dates in
>> > it
>> > and
>> > I'm wondering if the clean up job isn't doing what it's supposed to do.
>> > Is
>> > there a way I can remove rows from these tables safely?
>> > Thanks!
>>
>>
>>


From: jimbo on 14 Mar 2007 02:48
Paul,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you...Our shop has been in the middle
of upgrades.

I executed the procedure as you requested and here is the result:
"Removed 0 replicated transactions consisting of 0 statements in 484 seconds
(0 rows/sec)."

Thanks.

"Paul Ibison" wrote:

> This sounds ok. If you run:
> EXEC dbo.sp_MSdistribution_cleanup @min_distretention = 0,
> @max_distretention = 72
> in QA, what happens?
> Cheers,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
>
>
>
>
>
From: jimbo on 14 Mar 2007 03:45
Paul,

I have an update for you. I stopped all distribution and log reader agents,
effectively removing all access to the distribution database and executed the
procedure again. Here's what I got this time:
"Deactivated initial snapshot for anonymous publication(s). New
subscriptions must wait for the next scheduled snapshot.
Removed 25 replicated transactions consisting of 267 statements in 506
seconds (0 rows/sec)."

Thanks!


"Paul Ibison" wrote:

> This sounds ok. If you run:
> EXEC dbo.sp_MSdistribution_cleanup @min_distretention = 0,
> @max_distretention = 72
> in QA, what happens?
> Cheers,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
>
>
>
>
>
From: Hilary Cotter on 14 Mar 2007 10:15
Paul is in rehab, so let me answer this question for you.

Some of your subscriptions have expired. you need to run the snapshot and
next time the distribution agent runs it will distribute the new snapshot to
them.

If this happens frequently you might want to increase your history retention
period and your distribution retention period.

--
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



"jimbo" <crutch(a)newsgroups.nospam> wrote in message
news:B32C7E22-450D-425B-B27E-BC567FC8BE42(a)microsoft.com...
> Paul,
>
> I have an update for you. I stopped all distribution and log reader
> agents,
> effectively removing all access to the distribution database and executed
> the
> procedure again. Here's what I got this time:
> "Deactivated initial snapshot for anonymous publication(s). New
> subscriptions must wait for the next scheduled snapshot.
> Removed 25 replicated transactions consisting of 267 statements in 506
> seconds (0 rows/sec)."
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> "Paul Ibison" wrote:
>
>> This sounds ok. If you run:
>> EXEC dbo.sp_MSdistribution_cleanup @min_distretention = 0,
>> @max_distretention = 72
>> in QA, what happens?
>> Cheers,
>> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>


First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: SQL 2005 transaction repl verbose logging location
Next: murge process could not clean up the subscription