By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
437,557 Members | 1,067 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 437,557 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

HADR / Q replication comparison

P: n/a
I have found some text on HADR / Q replication comparison. Please let
me know if you agree with the accuracy!!

HADR DB2 II Q based Replication
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Sync, async, near-sync Near real time async
whole DB2 database selected tables/columns
DDL, DML DML only
very simple to set up and manage more complex to set up and manage
similar configurations only sites can be very different
no support for unlogged LOBs can support unlogged LOBs
1 read/write site only multiple read and/or update sites
No DPF DPF ok

Nov 12 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
1 Reply


P: n/a

Well,

I found the Q based replication rather easy to setup and really fast (being a
DBA and not a MQ specialist)
Of course, since you have the table/row level, you have more options and this
might appear more complicated.

I didn't try LOBs.

Juliane.
hi****@gmail.com wrote:
I have found some text on HADR / Q replication comparison. Please let
me know if you agree with the accuracy!!

HADR DB2 II Q based Replication
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Sync, async, near-sync Near real time async
whole DB2 database selected tables/columns
DDL, DML DML only
very simple to set up and manage more complex to set up and manage
similar configurations only sites can be very different
no support for unlogged LOBs can support unlogged LOBs
1 read/write site only multiple read and/or update sites
No DPF DPF ok

--
Message posted via DBMonster.com
http://www.dbmonster.com/Uwe/Forums....m-db2/200507/1
Nov 12 '05 #2

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.