Loose all data from tables
in [Replication]
|
Prev: move backward in transaction log with usage of sp_repldone
Next: error "Unexpected EOF encountered in BCP data-file" when initializ
From: Adam Simpson on 27 Aug 2009 08:11 I have created a database in a SQL server 2005 Workgroup edition and setup merge replication to several remote PC's. The server is the publisher and runs the merge agent All the subscriptions are of Client type The remote PC use a VPN to connect to the server. All the remote PC's are Windows XP running SQLExpress. When the remote users start the database application a script starts the replication and on closing the application the replication stops. This has been working fine for over a year, but about every 2 months or so one of the subscribers looses all the data out of some of his tables. I cant get the data back. In the end I have to delete the remote data set and subscription and then recreate it all again. Does anyone know why this happens or how to stop it. Thank you for any help Adam Simpson
From: Paul Ibison on 30 Aug 2009 05:03 Are you using some filters (dynamic)? Also, do you have evudence of conflicts? Thanks, Paul Ibison
From: Adam Simpson on 1 Sep 2009 09:42 Thanks for getting back Paul. I am not using any filtering The Resolve conflicts interactively is set to false on each subscriber. Looking at the system tables in the database there are a few records in some of the conflict tables, but not all the tables where the records were removed have conflict records. Is there anything particulay I should be looking for. Thanks Adam "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison(a)ReplicationAnswers.Com.(donotspam)> wrote in message news:E153A6BC-FCD9-4551-99CF-04709C8DD290(a)microsoft.com... > Are you using some filters (dynamic)? > Also, do you have evudence of conflicts? > Thanks, > Paul Ibison >
From: Paul Ibison on 1 Sep 2009 10:21 If there are no relevant filters and conflicts, then this is really strange. It looks like the rows are removed without firing the replication delete triggers on this particular subscriber which would be a manual process. I say this because they'd be also removed from the other nodes if it was a normal delete. You could verify this by checking in msmerge_tombstone for the guids of these particular rows - there should be corresponding records when the rows are removed and if these records don't exist then I'd suspect that the trigger has been disabled. If it occurs at the same time, then I'd look at running a profiler trace to keep an eye on it. HTH, Paul Ibison "Adam Simpson" wrote: > Thanks for getting back Paul. > > I am not using any filtering > > The Resolve conflicts interactively is set to false on each subscriber. > Looking at the system tables in the database there are a few records in some > of the conflict tables, but not all the tables where the records were > removed have conflict records. > > Is there anything particulay I should be looking for. > > Thanks Adam > > > "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison(a)ReplicationAnswers.Com.(donotspam)> wrote in > message news:E153A6BC-FCD9-4551-99CF-04709C8DD290(a)microsoft.com... > > Are you using some filters (dynamic)? > > Also, do you have evudence of conflicts? > > Thanks, > > Paul Ibison > > > > >
From: Adam Simpson on 2 Sep 2009 09:25
Thanks Paul I am not on site for the next couple of days but will look into it and post any findings when I get back. Regards Adam "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison(a)ReplicationAnswers.Com.(donotspam)> wrote in message news:4DF612E8-440F-43A4-B68F-7DC1C3947083(a)microsoft.com... > If there are no relevant filters and conflicts, then this is really > strange. > It looks like the rows are removed without firing the replication delete > triggers on this particular subscriber which would be a manual process. I > say > this because they'd be also removed from the other nodes if it was a > normal > delete. You could verify this by checking in msmerge_tombstone for the > guids > of these particular rows - there should be corresponding records when the > rows are removed and if these records don't exist then I'd suspect that > the > trigger has been disabled. If it occurs at the same time, then I'd look at > running a profiler trace to keep an eye on it. > HTH, > Paul Ibison > > > > "Adam Simpson" wrote: > >> Thanks for getting back Paul. >> >> I am not using any filtering >> >> The Resolve conflicts interactively is set to false on each subscriber. >> Looking at the system tables in the database there are a few records in >> some >> of the conflict tables, but not all the tables where the records were >> removed have conflict records. >> >> Is there anything particulay I should be looking for. >> >> Thanks Adam >> >> >> "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison(a)ReplicationAnswers.Com.(donotspam)> wrote in >> message news:E153A6BC-FCD9-4551-99CF-04709C8DD290(a)microsoft.com... >> > Are you using some filters (dynamic)? >> > Also, do you have evudence of conflicts? >> > Thanks, >> > Paul Ibison >> > >> >> >> |