I am getting the following error and can not figure out how to fix it. Please help.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,dist,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
sp_helpserver on SERVER2
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc,rpc out,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
PE3 PE3 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
SERVER1 SERVER1 rpc out,use remote collation 3 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
on SERVER2
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1089 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2003-11-19 01:44:51.920 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1601 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:33:17.007 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
3 1088 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-15 14:07:05.963 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
on SERVER1
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1249 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:20:40.747 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1609 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:30:58.750 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
2 1088 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:24:04.343 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
Thanks,
Chris T.
Have you configured your publisher to publish to the distributor? Connect to the distributor in EM and configure it in the Tools - Replication - Configure Distributor, Publishers and Subscribers, do it in the Publishers tab. Ensure you enter an administrative link password.
Then on your publisher disable replication and then re-enable it to use the remote distributor. Enter the administrative link password in this dialog.
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
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:OLPnLFjaHHA.2436@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
I am getting the following error and can not figure out how to fix it. Please help.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,dist,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
sp_helpserver on SERVER2
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc,rpc out,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
PE3 PE3 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
SERVER1 SERVER1 rpc out,use remote collation 3 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
on SERVER2
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1089 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2003-11-19 01:44:51.920 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1601 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:33:17.007 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
3 1088 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-15 14:07:05.963 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
on SERVER1
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1249 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:20:40.747 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1609 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:30:58.750 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
2 1088 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:24:04.343 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
Thanks,
Chris T.
|||Good morning Hilary,
Yes I enabled SERVER1 as the distributor and set a link password. I then went to SERVER2 and tried to publish a database I set the link password through the wizard. I am trying to setup SERVER1 as the distributor for SERVER2.
I am still receiving the error I have both servers setup as remote servers on both systems.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
Thanks,
Chris T.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:uYGrpLjaHHA.4772@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Have you configured your publisher to publish to the distributor? Connect to the distributor in EM and configure it in the Tools - Replication - Configure Distributor, Publishers and Subscribers, do it in the Publishers tab. Ensure you enter an administrative link password.
Then on your publisher disable replication and then re-enable it to use the remote distributor. Enter the administrative link password in this dialog.
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
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:OLPnLFjaHHA.2436@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
I am getting the following error and can not figure out how to fix it. Please help.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,dist,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
sp_helpserver on SERVER2
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc,rpc out,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
PE3 PE3 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
SERVER1 SERVER1 rpc out,use remote collation 3 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
on SERVER2
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1089 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2003-11-19 01:44:51.920 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1601 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:33:17.007 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
3 1088 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-15 14:07:05.963 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
on SERVER1
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1249 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:20:40.747 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1609 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:30:58.750 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
2 1088 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:24:04.343 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
Thanks,
Chris T.
|||In this output:
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
this entry does not look correct:
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
It appears that SERVER1 has been defined as ser on this server. What does select * from sysservers look like on SERVER1?
What does select @.@.servername return on SERVER1?
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:%23FiEphjaHHA.2436@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Good morning Hilary,
Yes I enabled SERVER1 as the distributor and set a link password. I then went to SERVER2 and tried to publish a database I set the link password through the wizard. I am trying to setup SERVER1 as the distributor for SERVER2.
I am still receiving the error I have both servers setup as remote servers on both systems.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
Thanks,
Chris T.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:uYGrpLjaHHA.4772@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Have you configured your publisher to publish to the distributor? Connect to the distributor in EM and configure it in the Tools - Replication - Configure Distributor, Publishers and Subscribers, do it in the Publishers tab. Ensure you enter an administrative link password.
Then on your publisher disable replication and then re-enable it to use the remote distributor. Enter the administrative link password in this dialog.
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
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:OLPnLFjaHHA.2436@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
I am getting the following error and can not figure out how to fix it. Please help.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,dist,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
sp_helpserver on SERVER2
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc,rpc out,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
PE3 PE3 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
SERVER1 SERVER1 rpc out,use remote collation 3 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
on SERVER2
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1089 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2003-11-19 01:44:51.920 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1601 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:33:17.007 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
3 1088 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-15 14:07:05.963 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
on SERVER1
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1249 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:20:40.747 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1609 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:30:58.750 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
2 1088 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:24:04.343 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
Thanks,
Chris T.
|||Randy,
What is ser ?
Answer 1:
select @.@.servername returns SERVER1
Answer 2:
on SERVER1
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1249 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:20:40.747 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1609 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:30:58.750 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
2 1088 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:24:04.343 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Chris T.
"Rand Boyd" <rboyd@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:uZiZ1jlaHHA.4508@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
In this output:
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
this entry does not look correct:
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
It appears that SERVER1 has been defined as ser on this server. What does select * from sysservers look like on SERVER1?
What does select @.@.servername return on SERVER1?
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:%23FiEphjaHHA.2436@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Good morning Hilary,
Yes I enabled SERVER1 as the distributor and set a link password. I then went to SERVER2 and tried to publish a database I set the link password through the wizard. I am trying to setup SERVER1 as the distributor for SERVER2.
I am still receiving the error I have both servers setup as remote servers on both systems.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
Thanks,
Chris T.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:uYGrpLjaHHA.4772@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Have you configured your publisher to publish to the distributor? Connect to the distributor in EM and configure it in the Tools - Replication - Configure Distributor, Publishers and Subscribers, do it in the Publishers tab. Ensure you enter an administrative link password.
Then on your publisher disable replication and then re-enable it to use the remote distributor. Enter the administrative link password in this dialog.
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
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:OLPnLFjaHHA.2436@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
I am getting the following error and can not figure out how to fix it. Please help.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,dist,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
sp_helpserver on SERVER2
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc,rpc out,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
PE3 PE3 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
SERVER1 SERVER1 rpc out,use remote collation 3 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
on SERVER2
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1089 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2003-11-19 01:44:51.920 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1601 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:33:17.007 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
3 1088 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-15 14:07:05.963 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
on SERVER1
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1249 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:20:40.747 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1609 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:30:58.750 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
2 1088 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:24:04.343 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
Thanks,
Chris T.
|||It was listed in the output. It maybe that the output got cut off. The first column in the output is the internal SQL Server name. But if @.servername is correct then it should be OK.
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:u6L4zulaHHA.5020@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Randy,
What is ser ?
Answer 1:
select @.@.servername returns SERVER1
Answer 2:
on SERVER1
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1249 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:20:40.747 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1609 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:30:58.750 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
2 1088 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:24:04.343 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Chris T.
"Rand Boyd" <rboyd@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:uZiZ1jlaHHA.4508@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
In this output:
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
this entry does not look correct:
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
It appears that SERVER1 has been defined as ser on this server. What does select * from sysservers look like on SERVER1?
What does select @.@.servername return on SERVER1?
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:%23FiEphjaHHA.2436@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Good morning Hilary,
Yes I enabled SERVER1 as the distributor and set a link password. I then went to SERVER2 and tried to publish a database I set the link password through the wizard. I am trying to setup SERVER1 as the distributor for SERVER2.
I am still receiving the error I have both servers setup as remote servers on both systems.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
Thanks,
Chris T.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:uYGrpLjaHHA.4772@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Have you configured your publisher to publish to the distributor? Connect to the distributor in EM and configure it in the Tools - Replication - Configure Distributor, Publishers and Subscribers, do it in the Publishers tab. Ensure you enter an administrative link password.
Then on your publisher disable replication and then re-enable it to use the remote distributor. Enter the administrative link password in this dialog.
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
"Chris T." <tatroc@.donotspam.gmail.com> wrote in message news:OLPnLFjaHHA.2436@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
I am getting the following error and can not figure out how to fix it. Please help.
SQL Server Enterprise Manager could not configure 'SERVER1' as the distributor for 'SERVER2'
Error 18482: Could not connect to server 'SERVER1' because 'SERVER2' is not defined as a remote server.
sp_helpserver on SERVER1
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,dist,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
ser SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,data access,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
sp_helpserver on SERVER2
SERVER2 SERVER2 rpc,rpc out,use remote collation 0 NULL 0 0
PE3 PE3 rpc out,use remote collation 2 NULL 0 0
SERVER1 SERVER1 rpc out,use remote collation 3 NULL 0 0
repl_distributor SERVER1 rpc,rpc out,system,use remote collation 1 NULL 0 0
on SERVER2
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1089 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2003-11-19 01:44:51.920 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1601 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:33:17.007 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
3 1088 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-15 14:07:05.963 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
on SERVER1
use master
select * from sysservers
0 1249 SERVER1 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:20:40.747 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 NULL
1 1609 repl_distributor SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER1 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:30:58.750 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 NULL
2 1088 SERVER2 SQL Server SQLOLEDB SERVER2 NULL NULL 2007-03-16 10:24:04.343 NULL NULL NULL NULL 0 0 SERVER2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 NULL
Thanks,
Chris T.
Showing posts with label enterprise. Show all posts
Showing posts with label enterprise. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Monday, March 26, 2012
Replication Distributor Version
What is the minimum SQL Server version I can use on my replication distributor server? My publisher and subscriber(s) will all be Enterprise Edition (64 bit). However, it seems awefully wasteful to put Enterprise Edition on a box that is just used for distribution. That's another $15K for a server that doesn't do much. Can I use a lower version (Express, Developer, Standard)?
Thank you,
Ben Wolf
This page (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143761.aspx) lists the features (including replication) that are supported by various editions of SQL server. (Go all the way to the bottom for replication)
Basically, Express is not supproted for distributor. Developer edition includes all the functionalities of Enterprise edition SQL server, but it is only licensed for development and/or test purpose, not as a production server.
Peng
|||Thank you, Peng. This is exactly what I needed. Looks like SE is the one for my distributor.
Thanks again,
Ben
sqlReplication Distributor Version
What is the minimum SQL Server version I can use on my replication distributor server? My publisher and subscriber(s) will all be Enterprise Edition (64 bit). However, it seems awefully wasteful to put Enterprise Edition on a box that is just used for distribution. That's another $15K for a server that doesn't do much. Can I use a lower version (Express, Developer, Standard)?
Thank you,
Ben Wolf
This page (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143761.aspx) lists the features (including replication) that are supported by various editions of SQL server. (Go all the way to the bottom for replication)
Basically, Express is not supproted for distributor. Developer edition includes all the functionalities of Enterprise edition SQL server, but it is only licensed for development and/or test purpose, not as a production server.
Peng
|||Thank you, Peng. This is exactly what I needed. Looks like SE is the one for my distributor.
Thanks again,
Ben
Friday, March 23, 2012
Replication Breaks after applying SP4
Hi
I installed SP4 on our enterprise server this morning and now all
replication jobs fail with the message "No such interface supported"
Has anyone seen this before / know how to resolve this?
We run Enterprise Edition on Win2003
Many Thanks
D
nope. I suggest you re-register the replication dll's and exes. I think you
can find them in c:\program files\microsoft sql server\mssql\80\com
"DJ" <DJ@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CA106D94-FD82-4099-A342-BF75A0910D5B@.microsoft.com...
> Hi
> I installed SP4 on our enterprise server this morning and now all
> replication jobs fail with the message "No such interface supported"
> Has anyone seen this before / know how to resolve this?
> We run Enterprise Edition on Win2003
> Many Thanks
> D
|||There was apparently an as yet not fully explained registry ACLing problem in
SP4 setup per the following thread (reported by Tomasz Skorupa originally):
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...85 a5a37097d4
With more than one person hitting the same problem, I would like to try
again and see if I can find out more about the cause of it. Was the user
running SP4 setup on the machine the same as the one running SQL Server Agent
service? If not, did the account running SP4 have privilege for enumerating
account information for the SQL Server Agent service account?
-Raymond Mak
"DJ" wrote:
> Hi
> I installed SP4 on our enterprise server this morning and now all
> replication jobs fail with the message "No such interface supported"
> Has anyone seen this before / know how to resolve this?
> We run Enterprise Edition on Win2003
> Many Thanks
> D
|||Thanks for the reply Raymond and apologies for not replying sooner but I have
been off work.
I tried re-registering the dll following the steps you mentioned in the
other thread but this did not work for me.
I re-registered them and stopped and started SQL Agent. Did I need to do
anything else?
The version of sqlrepss.dll on my instance is :2000.80.2039.0
I was not connected as the service account so I may not have had the
prvilages for enumeration the account informaion.
I can run the replication from the command line but I always get the error
when using Enterprise Manager.
Do you have any other suggestions to resolve this?
Many Thanks
Daryl
"Raymond Mak [MSFT]" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> There was apparently an as yet not fully explained registry ACLing problem in
> SP4 setup per the following thread (reported by Tomasz Skorupa originally):
> http://groups.google.com/group/micro...85 a5a37097d4
> With more than one person hitting the same problem, I would like to try
> again and see if I can find out more about the cause of it. Was the user
> running SP4 setup on the machine the same as the one running SQL Server Agent
> service? If not, did the account running SP4 have privilege for enumerating
> account information for the SQL Server Agent service account?
> -Raymond Mak
>
> "DJ" wrote:
sql
I installed SP4 on our enterprise server this morning and now all
replication jobs fail with the message "No such interface supported"
Has anyone seen this before / know how to resolve this?
We run Enterprise Edition on Win2003
Many Thanks
D
nope. I suggest you re-register the replication dll's and exes. I think you
can find them in c:\program files\microsoft sql server\mssql\80\com
"DJ" <DJ@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CA106D94-FD82-4099-A342-BF75A0910D5B@.microsoft.com...
> Hi
> I installed SP4 on our enterprise server this morning and now all
> replication jobs fail with the message "No such interface supported"
> Has anyone seen this before / know how to resolve this?
> We run Enterprise Edition on Win2003
> Many Thanks
> D
|||There was apparently an as yet not fully explained registry ACLing problem in
SP4 setup per the following thread (reported by Tomasz Skorupa originally):
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...85 a5a37097d4
With more than one person hitting the same problem, I would like to try
again and see if I can find out more about the cause of it. Was the user
running SP4 setup on the machine the same as the one running SQL Server Agent
service? If not, did the account running SP4 have privilege for enumerating
account information for the SQL Server Agent service account?
-Raymond Mak
"DJ" wrote:
> Hi
> I installed SP4 on our enterprise server this morning and now all
> replication jobs fail with the message "No such interface supported"
> Has anyone seen this before / know how to resolve this?
> We run Enterprise Edition on Win2003
> Many Thanks
> D
|||Thanks for the reply Raymond and apologies for not replying sooner but I have
been off work.
I tried re-registering the dll following the steps you mentioned in the
other thread but this did not work for me.
I re-registered them and stopped and started SQL Agent. Did I need to do
anything else?
The version of sqlrepss.dll on my instance is :2000.80.2039.0
I was not connected as the service account so I may not have had the
prvilages for enumeration the account informaion.
I can run the replication from the command line but I always get the error
when using Enterprise Manager.
Do you have any other suggestions to resolve this?
Many Thanks
Daryl
"Raymond Mak [MSFT]" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> There was apparently an as yet not fully explained registry ACLing problem in
> SP4 setup per the following thread (reported by Tomasz Skorupa originally):
> http://groups.google.com/group/micro...85 a5a37097d4
> With more than one person hitting the same problem, I would like to try
> again and see if I can find out more about the cause of it. Was the user
> running SP4 setup on the machine the same as the one running SQL Server Agent
> service? If not, did the account running SP4 have privilege for enumerating
> account information for the SQL Server Agent service account?
> -Raymond Mak
>
> "DJ" wrote:
sql
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Replication Between Instances Issue.
I'm doing Transactional Replication from Server1 to PC1.
Server1 Info:
Domain: A
SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition SP3.
SQL Server Services under Local System Account.
PC1 Info:
Domain: B
SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition SP3
SQL Server Services under Local System Account.
The process I did in EM was:
1. Create Remote Server to PC1 from Server1. Did not check RPC checkbox.Map all remote logins to same name. Did not check password.
2. Created Publisher and Distributer on Server1.
3. Publish new publication of DB1 in Server1.
4. Push new subscriber , auto create DB1_copy in PC1.
5. Snapshot successful.
6. Distributor Agent Failed.
Error Message:
The process could not connect to Subscriber 'Pc1'.
Error Details:
Login failed for user '(null)'. Reason: Not associated with a trusted SQL Server connection.
(Source: PC1 (Data source); Error number: 18452)
I have identical local WINNT ID's and password on both machine. I was guessing that would solve it. But it didn't.
Previously I did snapshot and transactional replication on the same machine itself( Server1 only). It was succesful.
Did I miss out anything?
Has it got to do with any Remote Server setting?
I've heard that Replication can only be done on the same domain. Is this true?
What if there are cases of different domains? Or in a workgroup perharps?
Or can it be overwritten by having 2 identical local WINNT ids in both machines?
Lastly, Can Personal Edition SQL Server 2000 do replication?Help?|||By not knowing your environment completely, I would suggest that you change your sql startup account from local system account to a network account. Use the same network account for both machine and, of course, it has to be admin in both machine.
Good luck!|||I've actually solve the problem and concluded by myself that replication can be done on separate domains or workgroups or whatever.
As long as an IP can ping the other IP, it will work.
During registration of Publisher and Subcriber, check "show advanced options" during the wizard. From there, there will be a section where u can click to chose Windows Authetication or SQL Server Login.
Chose SQL Server Login during Publisher Wizard and also SQL Server Login during Subscriber Wizard. And voila!, that will solve the problem.
However, again, this is thru test and fail method of solving a problem, are there any pointer anybody would like to share?sql
Server1 Info:
Domain: A
SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition SP3.
SQL Server Services under Local System Account.
PC1 Info:
Domain: B
SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition SP3
SQL Server Services under Local System Account.
The process I did in EM was:
1. Create Remote Server to PC1 from Server1. Did not check RPC checkbox.Map all remote logins to same name. Did not check password.
2. Created Publisher and Distributer on Server1.
3. Publish new publication of DB1 in Server1.
4. Push new subscriber , auto create DB1_copy in PC1.
5. Snapshot successful.
6. Distributor Agent Failed.
Error Message:
The process could not connect to Subscriber 'Pc1'.
Error Details:
Login failed for user '(null)'. Reason: Not associated with a trusted SQL Server connection.
(Source: PC1 (Data source); Error number: 18452)
I have identical local WINNT ID's and password on both machine. I was guessing that would solve it. But it didn't.
Previously I did snapshot and transactional replication on the same machine itself( Server1 only). It was succesful.
Did I miss out anything?
Has it got to do with any Remote Server setting?
I've heard that Replication can only be done on the same domain. Is this true?
What if there are cases of different domains? Or in a workgroup perharps?
Or can it be overwritten by having 2 identical local WINNT ids in both machines?
Lastly, Can Personal Edition SQL Server 2000 do replication?Help?|||By not knowing your environment completely, I would suggest that you change your sql startup account from local system account to a network account. Use the same network account for both machine and, of course, it has to be admin in both machine.
Good luck!|||I've actually solve the problem and concluded by myself that replication can be done on separate domains or workgroups or whatever.
As long as an IP can ping the other IP, it will work.
During registration of Publisher and Subcriber, check "show advanced options" during the wizard. From there, there will be a section where u can click to chose Windows Authetication or SQL Server Login.
Chose SQL Server Login during Publisher Wizard and also SQL Server Login during Subscriber Wizard. And voila!, that will solve the problem.
However, again, this is thru test and fail method of solving a problem, are there any pointer anybody would like to share?sql
replication between different sites
Can standard SQL2k replicate with enterprise edition within different sites?
*example - Central server(enterprise) in LA want to replicate with
branch(standard) in NY.
Imran,
these editions of sql server are completely compatible. As for different
sites, you'll need to follow the guidelines for replication across the
internet or non-trusted domains: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321822.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
(The ONLY sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
sql
*example - Central server(enterprise) in LA want to replicate with
branch(standard) in NY.
Imran,
these editions of sql server are completely compatible. As for different
sites, you'll need to follow the guidelines for replication across the
internet or non-trusted domains: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321822.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
(The ONLY sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
sql
Replication Architecture/Design advise
I have been asked to set-up replication in the current two server
enviornment. My understanding is that Log-Shipping requires
the Enterprise version of Sql Server 2000 (Which they do not
have the budget for).
They have 70 Databases that have a total space of aprox 30gb.
They want to replicate the data to the standby server so that
in the case of a failure they can redirect their Web Sites
to the standby Server.
Both servers will be in a co-lo facility so bandwidth between
the servers should be adequate.
Do I do central publisher with the distributor on the standby
server? I am not sure what kind of load this will have. I
understand that people recommend to put it on the publisher
server and only move it if load becomes an issue.
I understand that security (ie, users and permissions) will
not replicate. Other than having to set things up twice is
their other solutions to minimize this?
Sincerely,
Dave
you do not need the Enterprise Edition of SQL Server for log shipping. This
is a mistake in BOL.
Ideally what you want is automatic failover which means hardware or software
data mirroring - however it can be accomplished using log shipping, but you
will have to redirect your clients to the failed over server. You can then
log ship back to the original primary.
If you choose to use replication - I would use bi-directional transactional
replication keeping in mind
1) that every table you are replicating needs a pk
2) system objects and logins are not replicated
3) bi-directional transactional replication is not resilient to schema
changes (i.e. you have to drop your subscriptions and publication when you
want to make schema changes). Other replication types support partial schema
changes using sp_repladdcolumn and sp_repldropcolumn.
For log shipping you will find that
1) its not really scalable - I think you will find the logistical burden log
shipping 70 databases to be a bit overwhelming
2) your standby servers' databases will be read only
For replication you would be using a single publisher and subscriber. It is
a central publisher with one subscriber.
"David Gresham" <gresham@.panix.com> wrote in message
news:d50tct$5je$1@.reader1.panix.com...
>I have been asked to set-up replication in the current two server
> enviornment. My understanding is that Log-Shipping requires
> the Enterprise version of Sql Server 2000 (Which they do not
> have the budget for).
>
> They have 70 Databases that have a total space of aprox 30gb.
> They want to replicate the data to the standby server so that
> in the case of a failure they can redirect their Web Sites
> to the standby Server.
>
> Both servers will be in a co-lo facility so bandwidth between
> the servers should be adequate.
>
> Do I do central publisher with the distributor on the standby
> server? I am not sure what kind of load this will have. I
> understand that people recommend to put it on the publisher
> server and only move it if load becomes an issue.
>
> I understand that security (ie, users and permissions) will
> not replicate. Other than having to set things up twice is
> their other solutions to minimize this?
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> Dave
>
|||In article <umaTbQdTFHA.2172@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
Hilary Cotter <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote:
>you do not need the Enterprise Edition of SQL Server for log shipping. This
>is a mistake in BOL.
>Ideally what you want is automatic failover which means hardware or software
>data mirroring - however it can be accomplished using log shipping, but you
>will have to redirect your clients to the failed over server. You can then
>log ship back to the original primary.
>If you choose to use replication - I would use bi-directional transactional
>replication keeping in mind
>1) that every table you are replicating needs a pk
>2) system objects and logins are not replicated
>3) bi-directional transactional replication is not resilient to schema
>changes (i.e. you have to drop your subscriptions and publication when you
>want to make schema changes). Other replication types support partial schema
>changes using sp_repladdcolumn and sp_repldropcolumn.
>
Can you expand on what replication model this is? Is this Merge?
Does this mean that the standby server can update the primary?
My situation for this project is that the primary will update
the standby server and will only be used when the primary fails.
My other question is: Lets say we need to rebuild the primary
server. We re-build it and need to bring the databases back
from the standby server. Do we have to start over from scratch?
Or do we need to some-how rebuild everything? I am going to
be ordering your book today. I have worked with replication
before when all we were doing was creating a reporting database
which was read-only.
The standby concept seemed to follow this except for when we
needed to switch over to it. The client hosts several
web sites.
Thanks
Dave
>For log shipping you will find that
>1) its not really scalable - I think you will find the logistical burden log
>shipping 70 databases to be a bit overwhelming
>2) your standby servers' databases will be read only
>For replication you would be using a single publisher and subscriber. It is
>a central publisher with one subscriber.
>"David Gresham" <gresham@.panix.com> wrote in message
>news:d50tct$5je$1@.reader1.panix.com...
>
|||This is transactional, bi-directional transactional replication to be
specific, not to be confused with transactional replication with immediate
updating, transactional replication with queued updating, transactional
replication with immediate updating with queued failover, or merge
replication. However merge replication might work for you, although it will
add a guid column to each column you are replicating.
It does mean that your standby could update the primary, and it is an
excellent choice when the primary goes offline and all database activity
occurs on the standby server then.
Ideally you would use bi-directional replication in a case where your
publisher goes offline for an extended time period. When it comes back
online you should backup the standby by restore it on the publisher,
recreate the publications and subscriptions on the publisher and then do a
no sync,
Review this link for more info on these options.
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;820675
"David Gresham" <gresham@.panix.com> wrote in message
news:d52qja$4j4$1@.reader1.panix.com...
> In article <umaTbQdTFHA.2172@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
> Hilary Cotter <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you expand on what replication model this is? Is this Merge?
> Does this mean that the standby server can update the primary?
> My situation for this project is that the primary will update
> the standby server and will only be used when the primary fails.
> My other question is: Lets say we need to rebuild the primary
> server. We re-build it and need to bring the databases back
> from the standby server. Do we have to start over from scratch?
> Or do we need to some-how rebuild everything? I am going to
> be ordering your book today. I have worked with replication
> before when all we were doing was creating a reporting database
> which was read-only.
> The standby concept seemed to follow this except for when we
> needed to switch over to it. The client hosts several
> web sites.
> Thanks
>
> Dave
>
>
|||In article <eOqh7CmTFHA.544@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>,
Hilary Cotter <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote:
>This is transactional, bi-directional transactional replication to be
>specific, not to be confused with transactional replication with immediate
>updating, transactional replication with queued updating, transactional
>replication with immediate updating with queued failover, or merge
>replication. However merge replication might work for you, although it will
>add a guid column to each column you are replicating.
>It does mean that your standby could update the primary, and it is an
>excellent choice when the primary goes offline and all database activity
>occurs on the standby server then.
>Ideally you would use bi-directional replication in a case where your
>publisher goes offline for an extended time period. When it comes back
>online you should backup the standby by restore it on the publisher,
>recreate the publications and subscriptions on the publisher and then do a
>no sync,
>Review this link for more info on these options.
>http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;820675
>
In reading this document I got a 'little' intimidated by the need
for all these custom stored procedures. Since the server will
only be used in such a way that there would never be any
conflicts do I need to worry about this?
I also wanted to clarify where the distributor is in this set-up,
the Subscriber?
Thanks
Dave
sql
enviornment. My understanding is that Log-Shipping requires
the Enterprise version of Sql Server 2000 (Which they do not
have the budget for).
They have 70 Databases that have a total space of aprox 30gb.
They want to replicate the data to the standby server so that
in the case of a failure they can redirect their Web Sites
to the standby Server.
Both servers will be in a co-lo facility so bandwidth between
the servers should be adequate.
Do I do central publisher with the distributor on the standby
server? I am not sure what kind of load this will have. I
understand that people recommend to put it on the publisher
server and only move it if load becomes an issue.
I understand that security (ie, users and permissions) will
not replicate. Other than having to set things up twice is
their other solutions to minimize this?
Sincerely,
Dave
you do not need the Enterprise Edition of SQL Server for log shipping. This
is a mistake in BOL.
Ideally what you want is automatic failover which means hardware or software
data mirroring - however it can be accomplished using log shipping, but you
will have to redirect your clients to the failed over server. You can then
log ship back to the original primary.
If you choose to use replication - I would use bi-directional transactional
replication keeping in mind
1) that every table you are replicating needs a pk
2) system objects and logins are not replicated
3) bi-directional transactional replication is not resilient to schema
changes (i.e. you have to drop your subscriptions and publication when you
want to make schema changes). Other replication types support partial schema
changes using sp_repladdcolumn and sp_repldropcolumn.
For log shipping you will find that
1) its not really scalable - I think you will find the logistical burden log
shipping 70 databases to be a bit overwhelming
2) your standby servers' databases will be read only
For replication you would be using a single publisher and subscriber. It is
a central publisher with one subscriber.
"David Gresham" <gresham@.panix.com> wrote in message
news:d50tct$5je$1@.reader1.panix.com...
>I have been asked to set-up replication in the current two server
> enviornment. My understanding is that Log-Shipping requires
> the Enterprise version of Sql Server 2000 (Which they do not
> have the budget for).
>
> They have 70 Databases that have a total space of aprox 30gb.
> They want to replicate the data to the standby server so that
> in the case of a failure they can redirect their Web Sites
> to the standby Server.
>
> Both servers will be in a co-lo facility so bandwidth between
> the servers should be adequate.
>
> Do I do central publisher with the distributor on the standby
> server? I am not sure what kind of load this will have. I
> understand that people recommend to put it on the publisher
> server and only move it if load becomes an issue.
>
> I understand that security (ie, users and permissions) will
> not replicate. Other than having to set things up twice is
> their other solutions to minimize this?
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> Dave
>
|||In article <umaTbQdTFHA.2172@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
Hilary Cotter <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote:
>you do not need the Enterprise Edition of SQL Server for log shipping. This
>is a mistake in BOL.
>Ideally what you want is automatic failover which means hardware or software
>data mirroring - however it can be accomplished using log shipping, but you
>will have to redirect your clients to the failed over server. You can then
>log ship back to the original primary.
>If you choose to use replication - I would use bi-directional transactional
>replication keeping in mind
>1) that every table you are replicating needs a pk
>2) system objects and logins are not replicated
>3) bi-directional transactional replication is not resilient to schema
>changes (i.e. you have to drop your subscriptions and publication when you
>want to make schema changes). Other replication types support partial schema
>changes using sp_repladdcolumn and sp_repldropcolumn.
>
Can you expand on what replication model this is? Is this Merge?
Does this mean that the standby server can update the primary?
My situation for this project is that the primary will update
the standby server and will only be used when the primary fails.
My other question is: Lets say we need to rebuild the primary
server. We re-build it and need to bring the databases back
from the standby server. Do we have to start over from scratch?
Or do we need to some-how rebuild everything? I am going to
be ordering your book today. I have worked with replication
before when all we were doing was creating a reporting database
which was read-only.
The standby concept seemed to follow this except for when we
needed to switch over to it. The client hosts several
web sites.
Thanks
Dave
>For log shipping you will find that
>1) its not really scalable - I think you will find the logistical burden log
>shipping 70 databases to be a bit overwhelming
>2) your standby servers' databases will be read only
>For replication you would be using a single publisher and subscriber. It is
>a central publisher with one subscriber.
>"David Gresham" <gresham@.panix.com> wrote in message
>news:d50tct$5je$1@.reader1.panix.com...
>
|||This is transactional, bi-directional transactional replication to be
specific, not to be confused with transactional replication with immediate
updating, transactional replication with queued updating, transactional
replication with immediate updating with queued failover, or merge
replication. However merge replication might work for you, although it will
add a guid column to each column you are replicating.
It does mean that your standby could update the primary, and it is an
excellent choice when the primary goes offline and all database activity
occurs on the standby server then.
Ideally you would use bi-directional replication in a case where your
publisher goes offline for an extended time period. When it comes back
online you should backup the standby by restore it on the publisher,
recreate the publications and subscriptions on the publisher and then do a
no sync,
Review this link for more info on these options.
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;820675
"David Gresham" <gresham@.panix.com> wrote in message
news:d52qja$4j4$1@.reader1.panix.com...
> In article <umaTbQdTFHA.2172@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
> Hilary Cotter <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you expand on what replication model this is? Is this Merge?
> Does this mean that the standby server can update the primary?
> My situation for this project is that the primary will update
> the standby server and will only be used when the primary fails.
> My other question is: Lets say we need to rebuild the primary
> server. We re-build it and need to bring the databases back
> from the standby server. Do we have to start over from scratch?
> Or do we need to some-how rebuild everything? I am going to
> be ordering your book today. I have worked with replication
> before when all we were doing was creating a reporting database
> which was read-only.
> The standby concept seemed to follow this except for when we
> needed to switch over to it. The client hosts several
> web sites.
> Thanks
>
> Dave
>
>
|||In article <eOqh7CmTFHA.544@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>,
Hilary Cotter <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote:
>This is transactional, bi-directional transactional replication to be
>specific, not to be confused with transactional replication with immediate
>updating, transactional replication with queued updating, transactional
>replication with immediate updating with queued failover, or merge
>replication. However merge replication might work for you, although it will
>add a guid column to each column you are replicating.
>It does mean that your standby could update the primary, and it is an
>excellent choice when the primary goes offline and all database activity
>occurs on the standby server then.
>Ideally you would use bi-directional replication in a case where your
>publisher goes offline for an extended time period. When it comes back
>online you should backup the standby by restore it on the publisher,
>recreate the publications and subscriptions on the publisher and then do a
>no sync,
>Review this link for more info on these options.
>http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;820675
>
In reading this document I got a 'little' intimidated by the need
for all these custom stored procedures. Since the server will
only be used in such a way that there would never be any
conflicts do I need to worry about this?
I also wanted to clarify where the distributor is in this set-up,
the Subscriber?
Thanks
Dave
sql
Monday, March 12, 2012
Replication and Enterprise Manager
Hi
I have a very interesting situation with my replication. Replication works
great if I leave opened Enterprise Manager, but when I close it,
replication and SQL server does not work any more.
If I made a "mistake" and close EM, that the next morning SQL server does
not respond even if I reboot server. I must reinstall SQL service pack and
than it works. This was happened 5 time and now I am positivly shure that
this is the problem.
And yes ... this is SQL 2000 with SP3, Windows 2000 Server with Terminal
services installed.
Did anyone knows about this funny problem?
Thank you
what security context are your replication jobs running under? It sounds
like they are not running under a system administrator account.
To fix this right click on your agents and look at your agent properties.
Change the owner account to an account which is in the system administrator
role.
<dklancar@.nkbm.si> wrote in message
news:uxK3yvvFEHA.3188@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> I have a very interesting situation with my replication. Replication works
> great if I leave opened Enterprise Manager, but when I close it,
> replication and SQL server does not work any more.
> If I made a "mistake" and close EM, that the next morning SQL server does
> not respond even if I reboot server. I must reinstall SQL service pack and
> than it works. This was happened 5 time and now I am positivly shure that
> this is the problem.
> And yes ... this is SQL 2000 with SP3, Windows 2000 Server with Terminal
> services installed.
> Did anyone knows about this funny problem?
> Thank you
|||Thank you for response, but I must tell you, that all agent are running as
user listed in the system admin role.
Thank you again.
|||If SQL Server won't start, is there anything listed in hte Windows Application Log or the SQL Server log that sheds any light?
Regards,
Paul Ibison
I have a very interesting situation with my replication. Replication works
great if I leave opened Enterprise Manager, but when I close it,
replication and SQL server does not work any more.
If I made a "mistake" and close EM, that the next morning SQL server does
not respond even if I reboot server. I must reinstall SQL service pack and
than it works. This was happened 5 time and now I am positivly shure that
this is the problem.
And yes ... this is SQL 2000 with SP3, Windows 2000 Server with Terminal
services installed.
Did anyone knows about this funny problem?
Thank you
what security context are your replication jobs running under? It sounds
like they are not running under a system administrator account.
To fix this right click on your agents and look at your agent properties.
Change the owner account to an account which is in the system administrator
role.
<dklancar@.nkbm.si> wrote in message
news:uxK3yvvFEHA.3188@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> I have a very interesting situation with my replication. Replication works
> great if I leave opened Enterprise Manager, but when I close it,
> replication and SQL server does not work any more.
> If I made a "mistake" and close EM, that the next morning SQL server does
> not respond even if I reboot server. I must reinstall SQL service pack and
> than it works. This was happened 5 time and now I am positivly shure that
> this is the problem.
> And yes ... this is SQL 2000 with SP3, Windows 2000 Server with Terminal
> services installed.
> Did anyone knows about this funny problem?
> Thank you
|||Thank you for response, but I must tell you, that all agent are running as
user listed in the system admin role.
Thank you again.
|||If SQL Server won't start, is there anything listed in hte Windows Application Log or the SQL Server log that sheds any light?
Regards,
Paul Ibison
Friday, March 9, 2012
Replication & Different Versions
Hi,
Apologies if the answer to this is obvious, I'm not a SQL expert!
We've got a W2k3 cluster running SQL 2000 Enterprise edition.
I'm investigating the possibility of replicating this back to a standalone,
SQL 2000 Standard server.
Is this possible, or is not recommended to mix clustering arrangements or
SQL versions when replicating?
Pocket
This arrangement is fine. There are some restrictions as to which edition
can be the publisher in transactional replication, but this applies to MSDE
and Personal Edition. For Enterprise and Standard there are no issues.
HTH,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Paul,
Thank you: that's answered my question perfectly.
"Paul Ibison" wrote:
> This arrangement is fine. There are some restrictions as to which edition
> can be the publisher in transactional replication, but this applies to MSDE
> and Personal Edition. For Enterprise and Standard there are no issues.
> HTH,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>
>
Apologies if the answer to this is obvious, I'm not a SQL expert!
We've got a W2k3 cluster running SQL 2000 Enterprise edition.
I'm investigating the possibility of replicating this back to a standalone,
SQL 2000 Standard server.
Is this possible, or is not recommended to mix clustering arrangements or
SQL versions when replicating?
This arrangement is fine. There are some restrictions as to which edition
can be the publisher in transactional replication, but this applies to MSDE
and Personal Edition. For Enterprise and Standard there are no issues.
HTH,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Paul,
Thank you: that's answered my question perfectly.
"Paul Ibison" wrote:
> This arrangement is fine. There are some restrictions as to which edition
> can be the publisher in transactional replication, but this applies to MSDE
> and Personal Edition. For Enterprise and Standard there are no issues.
> HTH,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
> (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>
>
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Replication - Can not create Publication database
Hi,
I am trying to use Enterprise Manager Wizard to create a new
Publication database but I got the following message.
Error 2812: Could not find stored procedure
MyDB.dbo.sp_MSadd_logreader_agent
There seems that some replication stored procedures.
Any help?
Thanks in Advance"Ned" <nedabada@.yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:3578739c.0501071331.3e845f66@.posting.google.c om...
> Hi,
> I am trying to use Enterprise Manager Wizard to create a new
> Publication database but I got the following message.
> Error 2812: Could not find stored procedure
> MyDB.dbo.sp_MSadd_logreader_agent
> There seems that some replication stored procedures.
> Any help?
> Thanks in Advance
You might get a better answer in microsoft.public.sqlserver.replication.
There are also lots of similar posts in the past, although I don't know if
any will apply to your situation exactly - Google "sql 2000 replication
error 2812" or something similar.
Simon
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Replication
Hi guys,
Is it possible to replicate in MSSQL SERVER standard edition and be
supported? Or do I need to buy enterprise edition.
Is it possible to replicate in MSSQL SERVER standard edition and be
supported? Or do I need to buy enterprise edition.
Regards
Jaideepjai (dba_sybase2003@.yahoo.com) writes:
> Hi guys,
> Is it possible to replicate in MSSQL SERVER standard edition and be
> supported? Or do I need to buy enterprise edition.
You can do replicaiton in Standard Edition.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||Yeah I kind of knew that replication is possible in the standard
edition but will MIcrosoft support it.
Regards
Jaideep|||jai (dba_sybase2003@.yahoo.com) writes:
> Yeah I kind of knew that replication is possible in the standard
> edition but will MIcrosoft support it.
Yes.
Please check Books Online, the book SQL Server Architecture ->
Implementation Details -> Editions of SQL Server 2000 ->
Features Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2000.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||Erland,
I am new to sql server replication but I have worked with sybase
replication. At present, the machine housing the sql server has 2 g of
memory with 1.4 g for sql server. How much more (memory), would I need
if I make the same machine work as publisher as well as the
distributor?
Regards
Jaideep|||jai (dba_sybase2003@.yahoo.com) writes:
> Erland,
> I am new to sql server replication but I have worked with sybase
> replication. At present, the machine housing the sql server has 2 g of
> memory with 1.4 g for sql server. How much more (memory), would I need
> if I make the same machine work as publisher as well as the
> distributor?
You will have to ask the friendly people in
microsoft.public.sqlserver.replication about that. My own experience
of replication is very thin. My gut feeling is that it would depend a
lot of the data volume you intend to replicate.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||"jai" <dba_sybase2003@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1124737698.551148.233410@.z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> Erland,
> I am new to sql server replication but I have worked with sybase
> replication. At present, the machine housing the sql server has 2 g of
> memory with 1.4 g for sql server. How much more (memory), would I need
> if I make the same machine work as publisher as well as the
> distributor?
Howmuch data do you expect to replicate at any time?
Basically all that happens is the log reader puts rows into a distribution
DB which then gets used to distribute them to the subscribers.
You probably have enough RAM since you can't get much more in Standard
version anyway.
> Regards
> Jaideep
Replicating to SQL 2000/2005 Express
We would like to replicate from SQL 2000/2005 Enterprise Edition to its
Express version and wanted to know if there we any issues around it. This
would be transactional replication
Hassan,
the main distinction that I know of is that for pull subscriptions there is
the limitation of Windows Synchronization Manager or RMO. Also obviously
there can be no republishing.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com .
Express version and wanted to know if there we any issues around it. This
would be transactional replication
Hassan,
the main distinction that I know of is that for pull subscriptions there is
the limitation of Windows Synchronization Manager or RMO. Also obviously
there can be no republishing.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)