Peer to peer replication on SQL 2000?

Hello,
reading about peer-to-peer transactional replication in SQL 2005
(http://msdn2.microsoft.com/ms152536.aspx), I would like to do the same
thing with 3 SQL 2000 servers. Of course peer-to-peer replication is not
available, but can anybody suggest a way to simulate this kind of
replication with SQL 2000?
thanks,
al.
AL,
the nearest thing is probably bi-directional transactional replication:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;820675
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Bi directional transactional replication only works between 2 nodes. The
closest you can get is merge, but this would require your publisher to be
always accessible. If it goes down, the other two nodes are out of luck.
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
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:%23AE7C%23REGHA.3984@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> AL,
> the nearest thing is probably bi-directional transactional replication:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;820675
> Cheers,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>
|||Maybe I'm missing something it but according to the MS document, you can use
a central subscriber topology to use BiDirectional Transactional replication
to cater for more than two nodes?
Cheers,
Paul
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23P67ZKSEGHA.828@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Bi directional transactional replication only works between 2 nodes. The
> closest you can get is merge, but this would require your publisher to be
> always accessible. If it goes down, the other two nodes are out of luck.
> --
> 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
> "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
> news:%23AE7C%23REGHA.3984@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||Paul Ibison wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing something it but according to the MS document, you can use
> a central subscriber topology to use BiDirectional Transactional replication
> to cater for more than two nodes?
> Cheers,
> Paul
That's what I'm trying to do. Manually, as stated in that article. Still
working on it ;)
|||Well what do you know!
Last time I tried this I could not get it to work. Changes originating on
Server B would go to Server A and C but not back to B. Then them C would
loop back to A and go to B, and collision. Let me try to repro this again.
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
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:OlJqkTSEGHA.1384@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Maybe I'm missing something it but according to the MS document, you can
> use a central subscriber topology to use BiDirectional Transactional
> replication to cater for more than two nodes?
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23P67ZKSEGHA.828@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hilary,
I just managed to let this work, but it's a mess of things to do
manually (including generating - and then modifying!! - stored
procedures that will handle inserts/updates/deletes on other servers).
If you follow the instructions, and start with a simple table, you get
it working. The problem is then using this for a large db...
I'm still evaluating if it's worth the effort, but this is the only
solution I found (thanks Paul) to simulate what under SQL 2005 is called
"peer-to-peer transactional replication".
If you or anybody else is using this kind of replication, I'd like to
hear your opinions.
bye,
al.

> Well what do you know!
> Last time I tried this I could not get it to work. Changes originating on
> Server B would go to Server A and C but not back to B. Then them C would
> loop back to A and go to B, and collision. Let me try to repro this again.
>
|||It absolutely can not be done. You wind up with endlessly looping
transactions.
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"AL" <albeNOSPAM@.ihnetNOSPAM.it> wrote in message
news:uAJszyREGHA.376@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> reading about peer-to-peer transactional replication in SQL 2005
> (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/ms152536.aspx), I would like to do the same
> thing with 3 SQL 2000 servers. Of course peer-to-peer replication is not
> available, but can anybody suggest a way to simulate this kind of
> replication with SQL 2000?
> thanks,
> al.
|||Mike,
I like your explanation of avoiding closing the loop, but as there is only a
requirement for 3 servers (and the poster wants the nearest method in SQL
2000 to simulate peer-to-peer), why won't
ServerA <--> ServerB <--> ServerC
work? (you mention this in another reply ).
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Al,
it would help us to know if it is a requirement for all the nodes to
communicate with eachother (rather than having a simple chain). As you can
see from the thread, this is the crux of whether or not bidirectional TR is
applicable or not.
Rgds,
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
sql

Peer to Peer question.

BOL link:
ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/rpldata9/html/23e7e8c1-002f-4e69-8c99-d63e4100de64.htm
Howdy all. I was just reading up on this topic and have a question. It says
on this page (Topology with two participating databases) that reads will be
spread out between the two servers, thereby giving better performance. But it
doesnt say how that is accomplished. Does the app have to be designed a
specific way, like it would be if updates were going to go between the two
boxes in the same scenario?
TIA, ChrisR
Hi Chris - I would guess that they are talking about a load-balancing
middle-tier solution, but I can't see the exact link here. Can you post up
the topic header and I'll check out the page on the web.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
|||It's scale out read and write performance. Instead of having 100 users
banging away against one box you have two boxes and 50 of the 100 users
banging away against box 1 and the other 50 banging away against box 2. You
get improved performance because of reduced io contention, lock contention,
and improved concurrency.
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
"ChrisR" <ChrisR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8EB2FFF2-B2A5-4F1A-A0AB-58552D3C212D@.microsoft.com...
> BOL link:
> ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/rpldata9/html/23e7e8c1-002f-4e69-8c99-d63e4100de64.htm
> Howdy all. I was just reading up on this topic and have a question. It
> says
> on this page (Topology with two participating databases) that reads will
> be
> spread out between the two servers, thereby giving better performance. But
> it
> doesnt say how that is accomplished. Does the app have to be designed a
> specific way, like it would be if updates were going to go between the two
> boxes in the same scenario?
> TIA, ChrisR
>
|||I understand why you would want it to be spread out, but I don't understand
how it gets spread put. Does the app need to be written a certain way?
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> It's scale out read and write performance. Instead of having 100 users
> banging away against one box you have two boxes and 50 of the 100 users
> banging away against box 1 and the other 50 banging away against box 2. You
> get improved performance because of reduced io contention, lock contention,
> and improved concurrency.
> --
> 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
>
> "ChrisR" <ChrisR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8EB2FFF2-B2A5-4F1A-A0AB-58552D3C212D@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||replication [SQL Server], peer-to-peer replication/ Peer to Peer
Transactional Replication.
"Paul Ibison" wrote:

> Hi Chris - I would guess that they are talking about a load-balancing
> middle-tier solution, but I can't see the exact link here. Can you post up
> the topic header and I'll check out the page on the web.
> Cheers,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
>
>
|||DML which occurs on one server is sent to each node in the peer-to-peer
topology. Each command has an originating server tag on it so it does not
loop back.
The recommendations for writing a client app which uses the peer-to-peer
topology is that all updates are directed at one server to prevent
conflicts, the tables are perfectly partitioned to prevent conflicts and all
systems are quiesced when you make schema changes.
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
"ChrisR" <ChrisR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:37CA311D-26D6-42A9-88B7-A1396C8CB730@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
>I understand why you would want it to be spread out, but I don't understand
> how it gets spread put. Does the app need to be written a certain way?
>
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
|||Thanks guys.
"ChrisR" wrote:

> BOL link:
> ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/rpldata9/html/23e7e8c1-002f-4e69-8c99-d63e4100de64.htm
> Howdy all. I was just reading up on this topic and have a question. It says
> on this page (Topology with two participating databases) that reads will be
> spread out between the two servers, thereby giving better performance. But it
> doesnt say how that is accomplished. Does the app have to be designed a
> specific way, like it would be if updates were going to go between the two
> boxes in the same scenario?
> TIA, ChrisR
>

PDF Byte Error?

I've been reading through the group and seems like a lot of people
have been trying to display the report as a PDF in IE. However, the
byte stream is wrong so it won't allow it.
Does this happen in both methods that generate the output: the SOAP
Render method, and the URL Access (Format='PDF')?
Also, can someone tell me what the correct btye order/size needs to
be. We will use the render method, and then try to correct it by
writing a program. We'll then use the 'corrected' file and display in
a web browser.
Thanks,
rwiethornActually, it displays correctly in IE (which just launches Acrobat to
display the file).
The problem is that third-party tools for post-processing PDF aren't as
forgiving as Acrobat and might have trouble with our noncompliant format.
(We are, however, aware of the bug and have it in the queue to get fixed...
No estimate on when)
--
This post is provided 'AS IS' with no warranties, and confers no rights. All
rights reserved. Some assembly required. Batteries not included. Your
mileage may vary. Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear. No user
serviceable parts inside. Opening cover voids warranty. Keep out of reach of
children under 3.
"rwiethorn" <rwiethorn2002@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:553a0349.0408061300.54ad3e7d@.posting.google.com...
> I've been reading through the group and seems like a lot of people
> have been trying to display the report as a PDF in IE. However, the
> byte stream is wrong so it won't allow it.
> Does this happen in both methods that generate the output: the SOAP
> Render method, and the URL Access (Format='PDF')?
> Also, can someone tell me what the correct btye order/size needs to
> be. We will use the render method, and then try to correct it by
> writing a program. We'll then use the 'corrected' file and display in
> a web browser.
> Thanks,
> rwiethorn|||Hello,
I've found in this group that you have to set Language property of your
report to an expression which contains a '-'.
Fr is not supported but Fr-fr is Ok.
This problem occurs only when you want to generate PDF format.
Jerome Berthaud (MCSD)
http://www.winsight.fr
"rwiethorn" <rwiethorn2002@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:553a0349.0408061300.54ad3e7d@.posting.google.com...
> I've been reading through the group and seems like a lot of people
> have been trying to display the report as a PDF in IE. However, the
> byte stream is wrong so it won't allow it.
> Does this happen in both methods that generate the output: the SOAP
> Render method, and the URL Access (Format='PDF')?
> Also, can someone tell me what the correct btye order/size needs to
> be. We will use the render method, and then try to correct it by
> writing a program. We'll then use the 'corrected' file and display in
> a web browser.
> Thanks,
> rwiethorn