|
Home > Archive > MS SQL Server > September 2005 > Standby server
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-25, 7:23 am |
| I have a very specific question about copying a database to another server.
We have a database set up on a primary server. The same database has been
set up on an identical standby server. SQL has been switched off on the
standby, and we replicate the database and log files, for this database
only, from the main server to the standby server.
If we want to switch to the standby server, do we need to go through the
Attach or Restore process, or can we just start SQL with data and log files
that are different from what it started with? What specifically would be
wrong with this?
Thanks for any advice you can offer,
Anthony Yates
PS I am familiar with Attach/Detach and Backup/Restore
PPS I know that my logins will need to be reassigned before users use the
database
| |
| Tibor Karaszi 2005-09-25, 7:23 am |
| Are you stopping the primary SQL Server when you copy (replicate) the database files? If not, the
solution is definitely not supported, and I doubt that it will work. Even if you stop the SQL
Server, you are using an unsupported solution. Attach is only guaranteed to work if you detach
first. And only starting the other SQL Server might work, but again, it isn't supported.
Use Log Shipping instead: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oy/sqlhalp.mspx
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
"Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
news:uZ%23jSTbwFHA.2312@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>I have a very specific question about copying a database to another server.
> We have a database set up on a primary server. The same database has been set up on an identical
> standby server. SQL has been switched off on the standby, and we replicate the database and log
> files, for this database only, from the main server to the standby server.
> If we want to switch to the standby server, do we need to go through the Attach or Restore
> process, or can we just start SQL with data and log files that are different from what it started
> with? What specifically would be wrong with this?
> Thanks for any advice you can offer,
> Anthony Yates
> PS I am familiar with Attach/Detach and Backup/Restore
> PPS I know that my logins will need to be reassigned before users use the database
>
| |
|
| I agree unless there is some technical reason not too Log shipping would be
a better fit. However, we also have cases where ripping a coy of an active
OLTP away with the SAN and presenting that copy to another SQL Server works
well. One such case we do this every day on a 1TB+ size database and it
works. So if you primary fails and you have copies of all the data and log
files, attaching a copy of them on another SQL Server (same build) will
work. It will just go through a recovery period for rollback and
rollforward operations.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:upH$KqbwFHA.3756@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Are you stopping the primary SQL Server when you copy (replicate) the
> database files? If not, the solution is definitely not supported, and I
> doubt that it will work. Even if you stop the SQL Server, you are using an
> unsupported solution. Attach is only guaranteed to work if you detach
> first. And only starting the other SQL Server might work, but again, it
> isn't supported.
>
> Use Log Shipping instead:
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oy/sqlhalp.mspx
>
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
> Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
>
>
> "Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
> news:uZ%23jSTbwFHA.2312@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
| |
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-26, 7:23 am |
| Thanks for the replies. We are using Legato Replistor to make a replica of
the data and log files of a Sun database on SQL.
I am wondering if it is OK just to start the standby SQL with the updated
data and log files, or whether you need to go through the Attach process.
Does the standby SQL care if the data and log files are different (e.g a
different size) from when it last ran? We only replicate the Sun database,
not model, master, msdb, temp
Thanks
Anthony
"Danny" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:DgyZe.4233$kH3.356@trnddc01...
>I agree unless there is some technical reason not too Log shipping would be
>a better fit. However, we also have cases where ripping a coy of an active
>OLTP away with the SAN and presenting that copy to another SQL Server works
>well. One such case we do this every day on a 1TB+ size database and it
>works. So if you primary fails and you have copies of all the data and log
>files, attaching a copy of them on another SQL Server (same build) will
>work. It will just go through a recovery period for rollback and
>rollforward operations.
>
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:upH$KqbwFHA.3756@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
|
| Does Legato Replistor provide a consistent copy of the files? From a SAN
perspective consistent files is that all files in the copy process are
written to two places on othe disk with at dual write process. The data and
log files must be exactly in sync. I don't know Legato Replistor. If it's
software I'd be suspisous that it can provide both performance and
consistenty. As for your quetion of just starting the SQL Server, either
way SQL Server will go through a recovery process and do roll back and roll
forward operations. However, there are potential changes in master that
could cause the non attach scenario to fail. I suggest you leave the SQL
Server running, attach your database, and fix you logins in a script.
"Anthony Yates" < anthonyDINGyates@air
DONGdesk.com> wrote in message
news:%23JKY%23unwFHA
.2792@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the replies. We are using Legato Replistor to make a replica of
> the data and log files of a Sun database on SQL.
> I am wondering if it is OK just to start the standby SQL with the updated
> data and log files, or whether you need to go through the Attach process.
> Does the standby SQL care if the data and log files are different (e.g a
> different size) from when it last ran? We only replicate the Sun database,
> not model, master, msdb, temp
> Thanks
> Anthony
>
>
> "Danny" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:DgyZe.4233$kH3.356@trnddc01...
>
>
| |
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-27, 1:23 pm |
| Thanks very much.
Replistor is suppose to provide an exact copy, but I have never understood
how it is consistent. We store the log file on a different disk from the
data file, so they are synchronised in two different "specifications" (or
definitions) within Replistor. The replistor documentation talks about
replicating the whole SQL Data directory, but that asumes you have a very
simple setup. You clearly don't need to replicate Model, and I guess not
Temp either. The replication is asynchronous, but I have assumed that
Replistor keeps an internal clock of exactly what disk sector changed when.
As it happened, in this case we shut down SQL on the Source server, so there
should not have been any further changes going on.
I think you are right that the best way to approach this is to leave SQL
running but with the database unattached, then just attach it on failover.
However I would really like to know if there is actually anything wrong with
the practice of replicating the log and data files. The hypotheses I am
working on are:
- Maybe you need to replicate master and msdb as well. But I can't think of
what information they contain that you would need, asssuming the two SQL
servers are configured identically
- Maybe the database turning up as a new size causes an internal error while
SQL grows the disk space
-Maybe Replistor (older version) just has bugs
Thanks,
Anthony
"Danny" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:UPa_e.4449$211.824@trnddc08...
> Does Legato Replistor provide a consistent copy of the files? From a SAN
> perspective consistent files is that all files in the copy process are
> written to two places on othe disk with at dual write process. The data
> and log files must be exactly in sync. I don't know Legato Replistor. If
> it's software I'd be suspisous that it can provide both performance and
> consistenty. As for your quetion of just starting the SQL Server, either
> way SQL Server will go through a recovery process and do roll back and
> roll forward operations. However, there are potential changes in master
> that could cause the non attach scenario to fail. I suggest you leave the
> SQL Server running, attach your database, and fix you logins in a script.
>
>
> "Anthony Yates" < anthonyDINGyates@air
DONGdesk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23JKY%23unwFHA
.2792@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
| Tibor Karaszi 2005-09-27, 8:23 pm |
| Let me re-emphasis that this is an *unsupported* configuration by MS (unless the vendor has some
paper from MS stating otherwise). What happens if you need to fail over and something doesn't work?
Who will you call? What SQL Server expertise does the Replistor vendor have? Who do they talk to?
What deal do they have with MS?
Even of you do decide to go by this solution, you should definitely do frequent database and
transaction log backups.
> - Maybe you need to replicate master and msdb as well. But I can't think of what information they
> contain that you would need, asssuming the two SQL servers are configured identically
Anything in the system tables in those databases.
In master, you have things such as logins, linked servers, linked server logins, sp_configure
settings, user defines error messages, user created system procedures.
In msdb, you have things as jobs, alerts, operators.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
"Anthony Yates" < anthonyDINGyates@air
DONGdesk.com> wrote in message
news:%23wGlvC4wFHA.1276@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Thanks very much.
> Replistor is suppose to provide an exact copy, but I have never understood how it is consistent.
> We store the log file on a different disk from the data file, so they are synchronised in two
> different "specifications" (or definitions) within Replistor. The replistor documentation talks
> about replicating the whole SQL Data directory, but that asumes you have a very simple setup. You
> clearly don't need to replicate Model, and I guess not Temp either. The replication is
> asynchronous, but I have assumed that Replistor keeps an internal clock of exactly what disk
> sector changed when.
> As it happened, in this case we shut down SQL on the Source server, so there should not have been
> any further changes going on.
> I think you are right that the best way to approach this is to leave SQL running but with the
> database unattached, then just attach it on failover. However I would really like to know if there
> is actually anything wrong with the practice of replicating the log and data files. The hypotheses
> I am working on are:
> - Maybe you need to replicate master and msdb as well. But I can't think of what information they
> contain that you would need, asssuming the two SQL servers are configured identically
> - Maybe the database turning up as a new size causes an internal error while SQL grows the disk
> space
> -Maybe Replistor (older version) just has bugs
> Thanks,
> Anthony
>
>
>
>
>
> "Danny" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:UPa_e.4449$211.824@trnddc08...
>
>
| |
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-27, 8:23 pm |
| Tibor,
This is what I am trying to get to the bottom of:
"In master, you have things such as logins, linked servers, linked server
logins, sp_configure settings, user defines error messages, user created
system procedures" - nothing there I can think of that would cause
corruption. We fix the logins after starting the standby SQL. The two copies
of SQL start off identical.
"In msdb, you have things as jobs, alerts, operators" -also things to fix up
afterwards, nothing to cause corruption.
My basic question is: what is the difference between:
1) Copying the data and log files and attaching them to the instance of SQL,
and
2) Copying the data and log files over the top of a previously-attached
database and restarting SQL?
The obvious thing is that the size of the database would be different, but I
can't see anything in the master or msdb that defines the size.
Any ideas most welcome,
Anthony
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:%23nsv5K5wFHA.3252@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Let me re-emphasis that this is an *unsupported* configuration by MS
> (unless the vendor has some paper from MS stating otherwise). What happens
> if you need to fail over and something doesn't work? Who will you call?
> What SQL Server expertise does the Replistor vendor have? Who do they talk
> to? What deal do they have with MS?
>
> Even of you do decide to go by this solution, you should definitely do
> frequent database and transaction log backups.
>
>
>
> Anything in the system tables in those databases.
> In master, you have things such as logins, linked servers, linked server
> logins, sp_configure settings, user defines error messages, user created
> system procedures.
> In msdb, you have things as jobs, alerts, operators.
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
> Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
>
>
> "Anthony Yates" < anthonyDINGyates@air
DONGdesk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23wGlvC4wFHA.1276@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
| |
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-27, 8:23 pm |
| Replistor are a proper supported solution:
http://www.microsoft.com/servicepro...ers/legato.mspx
Veritas Volume Replicator is another:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsser...s/showcase.mspx
Anthony
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:%23nsv5K5wFHA.3252@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Let me re-emphasis that this is an *unsupported* configuration by MS
> (unless the vendor has some paper from MS stating otherwise). What happens
> if you need to fail over and something doesn't work? Who will you call?
> What SQL Server expertise does the Replistor vendor have? Who do they talk
> to? What deal do they have with MS?
>
> Even of you do decide to go by this solution, you should definitely do
> frequent database and transaction log backups.
>
>
>
> Anything in the system tables in those databases.
> In master, you have things such as logins, linked servers, linked server
> logins, sp_configure settings, user defines error messages, user created
> system procedures.
> In msdb, you have things as jobs, alerts, operators.
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
> Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
>
>
> "Anthony Yates" < anthonyDINGyates@air
DONGdesk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23wGlvC4wFHA.1276@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
| |
|
| Of course Tibor is correct. Good advice.
Now about implementing the risky solution... First don't replicate master
unless everything is exactly the same on the server, this included the
server name. Two things come to mind in master, the DB id associated with
the database and the file definitions in sysaltfiles.
Again I'm suspicious of maintaining file consistency.
"Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
news:eAV5Eb6wFHA.664@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Tibor,
> This is what I am trying to get to the bottom of:
> "In master, you have things such as logins, linked servers, linked server
> logins, sp_configure settings, user defines error messages, user created
> system procedures" - nothing there I can think of that would cause
> corruption. We fix the logins after starting the standby SQL. The two
> copies of SQL start off identical.
> "In msdb, you have things as jobs, alerts, operators" -also things to fix
> up afterwards, nothing to cause corruption.
>
> My basic question is: what is the difference between:
> 1) Copying the data and log files and attaching them to the instance of
> SQL, and
> 2) Copying the data and log files over the top of a previously-attached
> database and restarting SQL?
>
> The obvious thing is that the size of the database would be different, but
> I can't see anything in the master or msdb that defines the size.
> Any ideas most welcome,
> Anthony
>
>
>
>
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:%23nsv5K5wFHA.3252@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
| Tibor Karaszi 2005-09-28, 3:23 am |
| > 1) Copying the data and log files and attaching them to the instance of SQL,
Sp_attach_db is only "guaranteed" to work if you detached the database first. Below is a quote from
Books Online:
"sp_attach_db should only be executed on databases that were previously detached from the database
server using an explicit sp_detach_db operation."
> 2) Copying the data and log files over the top of a previously-attached database and restarting
> SQL?
Well, you aren't doing attach, so you don't have above to consider. But, to my knowledge it is not a
supported solution. See my other post.
You should be fine regarding the database file size, to my knowledge (from an architectural
viewpoint). It is difficult to give a definite answer as we don't have any documentation to go on.
To MS, this isn't supported, so we can't ask them. So, you really should ask the vendor of the
replicate product. If they can't answer, well...
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
"Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
news:eAV5Eb6wFHA.664@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Tibor,
> This is what I am trying to get to the bottom of:
> "In master, you have things such as logins, linked servers, linked server logins, sp_configure
> settings, user defines error messages, user created system procedures" - nothing there I can think
> of that would cause corruption. We fix the logins after starting the standby SQL. The two copies
> of SQL start off identical.
> "In msdb, you have things as jobs, alerts, operators" -also things to fix up afterwards, nothing
> to cause corruption.
>
> My basic question is: what is the difference between:
> 1) Copying the data and log files and attaching them to the instance of SQL, and
> 2) Copying the data and log files over the top of a previously-attached database and restarting
> SQL?
>
> The obvious thing is that the size of the database would be different, but I can't see anything in
> the master or msdb that defines the size.
> Any ideas most welcome,
> Anthony
>
>
>
>
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23nsv5K5wFHA.3252@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
|
|
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-28, 7:23 am |
| Thanks for your help. Much appreciated. I accept that the process we are
following is a Replistor one, rather than a MS one.
The Replistor documentation describes replicating the whole SQL data
directory, but it is more as a default than as a requirement. You obviously
don't need to replicate Model, for example, and anyway the log file is
stored on a different drive so you would need to replicate that as well. I
am talking to Replistor now about whether it is necessary to replicate msdb
and master. I don't mind if we have to do that, but I'd like to confirm that
was the cause of the problem, because if it was not, and if it is just a bug
in that version of Replistor, then we still have the same defect.
A Detach/Attach can't be done if the source server has failed, and anyway
takes over an hour, so it does not provide adequate resilience.
I think we need to go back to Replistor, and change product if we don't get
an adequate answer.
Regards,
Anthony
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:e5dAzDAxFHA.720@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
> Sp_attach_db is only "guaranteed" to work if you detached the database
> first. Below is a quote from Books Online:
> "sp_attach_db should only be executed on databases that were previously
> detached from the database server using an explicit sp_detach_db
> operation."
>
>
>
> Well, you aren't doing attach, so you don't have above to consider. But,
> to my knowledge it is not a supported solution. See my other post.
>
> You should be fine regarding the database file size, to my knowledge (from
> an architectural viewpoint). It is difficult to give a definite answer as
> we don't have any documentation to go on. To MS, this isn't supported, so
> we can't ask them. So, you really should ask the vendor of the replicate
> product. If they can't answer, well...
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
> Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
>
>
> "Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
> news:eAV5Eb6wFHA.664@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
| |
|
| Make sure they can rip a copy of all the data and log files for a given
database at exactly the same time all the way down to the committed writes
to the disk. If you don't you will get torn pages, object problems, etc.
Check your SQL log from the attach taking so long. All an sp_attach_db
contains is a create database for attach statement. It should be your roll
backs or roll forwards that caused the lenghtly attach time. The amount of
work to do depends on what changes where occuring in the source system and
when the last check point occurred.
"Anthony Yates" < anthonyDINGyates@air
DONGdesk.com> wrote in message
news:%23G2bL3BxFHA.3188@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for your help. Much appreciated. I accept that the process we are
> following is a Replistor one, rather than a MS one.
> The Replistor documentation describes replicating the whole SQL data
> directory, but it is more as a default than as a requirement. You
> obviously don't need to replicate Model, for example, and anyway the log
> file is stored on a different drive so you would need to replicate that as
> well. I am talking to Replistor now about whether it is necessary to
> replicate msdb and master. I don't mind if we have to do that, but I'd
> like to confirm that was the cause of the problem, because if it was not,
> and if it is just a bug in that version of Replistor, then we still have
> the same defect.
>
> A Detach/Attach can't be done if the source server has failed, and anyway
> takes over an hour, so it does not provide adequate resilience.
>
> I think we need to go back to Replistor, and change product if we don't
> get an adequate answer.
>
> Regards,
> Anthony
>
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:e5dAzDAxFHA.720@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-28, 9:23 am |
| That is looking like a possible explanantion. The log file and data file
replicas may not be synchronised with each other.
You're right about the attach. What I meant was that a Copy operations
(detach, attach etc) takes about an hour,
Thanks for your help,
Regards,
Anthony
"Danny" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:EFv_e.15848$SG3.2032@trnddc07...
> Make sure they can rip a copy of all the data and log files for a given
> database at exactly the same time all the way down to the committed writes
> to the disk. If you don't you will get torn pages, object problems, etc.
>
> Check your SQL log from the attach taking so long. All an sp_attach_db
> contains is a create database for attach statement. It should be your
> roll backs or roll forwards that caused the lenghtly attach time. The
> amount of work to do depends on what changes where occuring in the source
> system and when the last check point occurred.
>
> "Anthony Yates" < anthonyDINGyates@air
DONGdesk.com> wrote in message
> news:%23G2bL3BxFHA.3188@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-29, 7:23 am |
| This MS article is very interesting. It covers asynchronous replication of
databases with third party products. It also seems to suggest that you would
replicate the productions databases only, and use other techniques for
master and msdb.
Basically this is exactly what we are doing with Replistor, and yet we have
a corrupted database on switchover.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oy/hasog05.mspx
Regards,
Anthony
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:Ooi5$EAxFHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I didn't see anything in the links you posted saying that these products
>are supported to use with SQL Server. I will give up here, though. You seem
>to be determined to use these products with SQL Server, and I hope that I
>managed to get the things to be cautious about across. In the end it is
>your decision.
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
> Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
>
>
> "Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
> news:eCvEZe6wFHA.1856@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
| |
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-29, 7:23 am |
| And I forgot to add, the small print says don't use dynamic disks. Of course
we _are_ using dynamic disks! Whether that's important or not, who knows?
Anthony
"Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
news:uiWA4XNxFHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> This MS article is very interesting. It covers asynchronous replication of
> databases with third party products. It also seems to suggest that you
> would replicate the productions databases only, and use other techniques
> for master and msdb.
> Basically this is exactly what we are doing with Replistor, and yet we
> have a corrupted database on switchover.
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oy/hasog05.mspx
> Regards,
> Anthony
>
>
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:Ooi5$EAxFHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
| Tibor Karaszi 2005-09-29, 8:23 pm |
| Thanks for posting the links, Anthony. I hope you work out your problems, possibly with help of the
Replistor vendor... :-)
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
"Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
news:uiWA4XNxFHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> This MS article is very interesting. It covers asynchronous replication of databases with third
> party products. It also seems to suggest that you would replicate the productions databases only,
> and use other techniques for master and msdb.
> Basically this is exactly what we are doing with Replistor, and yet we have a corrupted database
> on switchover.
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oy/hasog05.mspx
> Regards,
> Anthony
>
>
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:Ooi5$EAxFHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
>
| |
| Anthony Yates 2005-09-30, 7:23 am |
| I think we will be dropping Replistor. The support is not good enough to
rely on. They have a basic document for replicating SQL, but it just says,
in effect, "Replicate the Data directory". Well, our log files are on
another drive. Obviously we need to replicate those too, but then we have
departed from the documented method and they can't say whether it works or
not. I am sure the technical guys at Legato know how to do it, but you don't
get support from them. It comes from the country distributor who does not
know. We don't have weeks to spare while they talk to each other.
Thanks again for the responses,
Anthony
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no. email_karaszi@hotmai
l.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:%23g1y5sTxFHA.2620@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for posting the links, Anthony. I hope you work out your problems,
> possibly with help of the Replistor vendor... :-)
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www. solidqualitylearning
.com/
> Blog: http:// solidqualitylearning
.com/blogs/tibor/
>
>
> "Anthony Yates" <anthony.spam@spammedout.com> wrote in message
> news:uiWA4XNxFHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
|
|
|
|
|