Replication & NDF

If my replicating db has an .mdf/.ndf/.ldf, with some tables being located on the Secondary Data File, should I change the schema of the replicated database to match the replicating db?
Does it matter? Would it be a 'best practice' to have both database schemas the same?
I didn't setup the .NDF, I basically inherited it from a third party software addition, who placed some of their tables on an .ndf.
I'm debating whether or not it matters in relation to replicating this database. What would you do?
Thanx for your opinion!
JLS,
I'd say 'it depends' Are you getting significant performance benefits by using filegroups? Do you need those same benefits on the subscriber? Do you have the corresponding disk setup on the subscriber? I'm assuming each filegroup is on a different disk here, otherwise I see no reason to have this setup even on the publisher.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||" I'm assuming each filegroup is on a different disk here, otherwise I see no reason to have this setup even on the publisher."
Perfect, and exactly what I thought!!!! I knew this guy didn't have a clue as to what he was doing, and you just confirmed this for me. I read the exact same thing, and also hedged due to the fact that if the NDF becomes corrupt, the entire db is marked Suspect.....
Thanx once again Paul!
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message news:uwKaevZ2FHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
JLS,
I'd say 'it depends' Are you getting significant performance benefits by using filegroups? Do you need those same benefits on the subscriber? Do you have the corresponding disk setup on the subscriber? I'm assuming each filegroup is on a different disk here, otherwise I see no reason to have this setup even on the publisher.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||JLS,
there might be possibly another reason he used this setup. Do you use filegroup backups? I don't use them, but if the database is too large for a conventional backup strategy, filegroups are sometimes used.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison
|||I would evaluate 1) whether the files are in their own file groups or a different file group
2) if so, are these files on the same logical/physical disk or are they on the same controller or are they all hanging off a san.
3) are the indexes or text or image data on these different files - there is a performance boost for doing this - and you can backup the image and text columns separate from the other file backups.
If they are on different files or different file groups is this to allow you to do file/filegroup level backups and do you need this?
If they are on different file groups and they are hanging off the same drive (logical or physical) or off the same controller or san there is no performance benefit to have them on different files, filegroups.
On SQL 7 there was a performance boost if you had multiple files in your filegroup. In SQL 2000 on win2k there could be in some situations - but this has gone away in win2003.
In short, I think the answer is no.
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
"JLS" <jlshoop@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:et4WmgZ2FHA.4076@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
If my replicating db has an .mdf/.ndf/.ldf, with some tables being located on the Secondary Data File, should I change the schema of the replicated database to match the replicating db?
Does it matter? Would it be a 'best practice' to have both database schemas the same?
I didn't setup the .NDF, I basically inherited it from a third party software addition, who placed some of their tables on an .ndf.
I'm debating whether or not it matters in relation to replicating this database. What would you do?
Thanx for your opinion!
|||No, we do database backups using 3rd party tool, LiteSpeed.
So, I see no advantage to the .ndf & am planning to replicate without considering the .ndf
Thanx for your opinions & advice, I really appreciate it!!!!
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message news:OVvZ7ta2FHA.3156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
JLS,
there might be possibly another reason he used this setup. Do you use filegroup backups? I don't use them, but if the database is too large for a conventional backup strategy, filegroups are sometimes used.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison
|||Short answer is what I thought you would say, Thanx!
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:OXFxh1c2FHA.3912@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
I would evaluate 1) whether the files are in their own file groups or a different file group
2) if so, are these files on the same logical/physical disk or are they on the same controller or are they all hanging off a san.
3) are the indexes or text or image data on these different files - there is a performance boost for doing this - and you can backup the image and text columns separate from the other file backups.
If they are on different files or different file groups is this to allow you to do file/filegroup level backups and do you need this?
If they are on different file groups and they are hanging off the same drive (logical or physical) or off the same controller or san there is no performance benefit to have them on different files, filegroups.
On SQL 7 there was a performance boost if you had multiple files in your filegroup. In SQL 2000 on win2k there could be in some situations - but this has gone away in win2003.
In short, I think the answer is no.
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
"JLS" <jlshoop@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:et4WmgZ2FHA.4076@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
If my replicating db has an .mdf/.ndf/.ldf, with some tables being located on the Secondary Data File, should I change the schema of the replicated database to match the replicating db?
Does it matter? Would it be a 'best practice' to have both database schemas the same?
I didn't setup the .NDF, I basically inherited it from a third party software addition, who placed some of their tables on an .ndf.
I'm debating whether or not it matters in relation to replicating this database. What would you do?
Thanx for your opinion!