Wrox Programmer Forums
|
SQL Server 2000 General discussion of Microsoft SQL Server -- for topics that don't fit in one of the more specific SQL Server forums. version 2000 only. There's a new forum for SQL Server 2005.
Welcome to the p2p.wrox.com Forums.

You are currently viewing the SQL Server 2000 section of the Wrox Programmer to Programmer discussions. This is a community of software programmers and website developers including Wrox book authors and readers. New member registration was closed in 2019. New posts were shut off and the site was archived into this static format as of October 1, 2020. If you require technical support for a Wrox book please contact http://hub.wiley.com
 
Old April 17th, 2007, 05:28 AM
Friend of Wrox
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,480
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Replication

Hi,

I was thinking if I can setup replication where a Subscriber can be a Publisher to another (Publishing Subscriber) in Merge replication.

Publisher - Server1
Subscriber - Server2 (which can in turn be a publisher to Server 3)
Subscriber - Server3

I hope this is not going to be possible. Still I wanted to know if someone has better idea about that.

Cheers.

_________________________
- Vijay G
Strive for Perfection
__________________
- Vijay G
 
Old April 24th, 2007, 01:56 PM
Friend of Wrox
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 385
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

you should possibly think about a single table that self references.

 
Old April 24th, 2007, 05:15 PM
Friend of Wrox
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 599
Thanks: 6
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

I'm pretty sure you can set this up but I'm wondering why would you want or need to do that? MS replication is messy as it is... you're always going to be pushing it by making it more complicated than it needs to be.

If you just want to get the same data to Server3, you could set up a merge replication directly to server 1 but somehow I think there's something else going on.

If its a management request, I always tell them that whatever they want to do is probably possible if they want to spend the money. Then I tell them how much it could cost and that usually stops things right there. You may have some luck with it though and have it work great but I sense a couple of support calls to Microsoft when the ****e hits the fan. I did have merge replication running to four separate locations pretty well. I did, however, need one support call to MS which after weeks of lower level support, my call finally got escalated to one of the pros who had a work around for me in less than a minute. We were using transactional replication and having problems with it which I found out had known issues. So the tech told me to change to merge replication and set the merge time to one (1) minute which worked fine for us and we had no problems after that.


 
Old April 26th, 2007, 08:52 AM
Friend of Wrox
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,480
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Yes, I read somewhere that there can be this type of topology where a subscriber can be a publisher to another. The requirement is like that, so as to not add more load to the Server1 which already is a publisher to many other subscribers. Let me still dig this out and see how tough it is going to be or how fruitful it could be if setup.

Thanks much for your ideas and time.
Cheers.

_________________________
- Vijay G
Strive for Perfection





Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Replication problem ajabbabahalmigiriha Reporting Services 0 September 11th, 2007 03:20 AM
triggers in replication melvik SQL Server 2000 3 July 11th, 2007 01:44 AM
Q about Replication D.A.D Java Databases 0 June 1st, 2007 02:14 AM
Replication KellyM955 SQL Server 2000 2 February 21st, 2005 11:27 PM





Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.