Prev: merge replication snapshot problem
Next: Transactional Replication (with Update) problem
From: nj on 11 Nov 2009 18:11
Hi,

I am configuring Merge replication for one of our new critical
project..This project has requirment to have servers on multiple
locations..Here is the basic architecture of replication setup..

Node A -- Publisher
Node B -- Subscriber 1
Node C -- Subscriber 2
Node D -- Subscriber 3

So I have few question about this architecture..If Publisher goes down
for 2 hours the all the subscriber would work independently or there
is any way to sync both subscriber until publisher is down..

Or Is there any other way where we can have 3-4 node (updateable) in
sync all the time without the restriction of publisher going down..

Basically we are trying to have something like Multi-Master
replication in Oracle which provides real-time synching among all the
nodes..

Thanks,
NJ
From: Hilary Cotter on 11 Nov 2009 19:22
You might have some success with an alt sync partner. However, you really
should be using peer to peer replication for this functionality.

"nj" <njandwani(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c66a256e-9ca6-4161-b939-22b4b68b04d2(a)s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I am configuring Merge replication for one of our new critical
> project..This project has requirment to have servers on multiple
> locations..Here is the basic architecture of replication setup..
>
> Node A -- Publisher
> Node B -- Subscriber 1
> Node C -- Subscriber 2
> Node D -- Subscriber 3
>
> So I have few question about this architecture..If Publisher goes down
> for 2 hours the all the subscriber would work independently or there
> is any way to sync both subscriber until publisher is down..
>
> Or Is there any other way where we can have 3-4 node (updateable) in
> sync all the time without the restriction of publisher going down..
>
> Basically we are trying to have something like Multi-Master
> replication in Oracle which provides real-time synching among all the
> nodes..
>
> Thanks,
> NJ

From: nj on 11 Nov 2009 19:57
But Peer-to-Peer replication doesn't provide conflict resolution and
also per books online prefers that update sent to one node only..Which
is a big restriction for our env..

Any other ideas..

Thanks,
NJ
From: Hilary Cotter on 12 Nov 2009 10:02
Yes, p2p does not provide conflict detection in SQL 2005, it does in SQL
2008.

Keep in mind that the best way to handle conflicts is to avoid them,
preferably by partitioning your data so that they don't occur.

The recommendation to make all updates happen on one node is to prevent
conflicts, its not a hard rule per se.

Hilary
"nj" <njandwani(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:31f90741-53e8-4dd6-af6b-01b698d6e045(a)w37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> But Peer-to-Peer replication doesn't provide conflict resolution and
> also per books online prefers that update sent to one node only..Which
> is a big restriction for our env..
>
> Any other ideas..
>
> Thanks,
> NJ

From: Paul Ibison on 21 Nov 2009 10:04
There is the option to "p2p_continue_onconflict" but this doesn't guarantee
convergence. Works ok for update-update conflicts but not all other types.
HTH,
Paul Ibison

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: merge replication snapshot problem
Next: Transactional Replication (with Update) problem