By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
440,304 Members | 3,172 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 440,304 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

replication problems with structure/trigger/identity

P: n/a
Hello alltogether,
i'm working on a database-plattform which should work with
Therefor 2 identic machines with internal RAID are available, which work
in single-host-netloadbalance on win2003-server.
Because of the internal RAID and caused by costs, a solution without
external SCSI-RAID and win2003-clustering-mechanism is looked for.

First i tried to use merge-replication but the rowguid-column, which is
added, makes the application unable to use the database (sql-statements
without column-specification). The application is bought and not easy
Second i tried transaction-replication, which seamed to work, but no
key- and identity-attributes are replicated. When the first machine now
stops and second gets master, there are problems caused by the missing
identities (auto-increment). I got errors caused by triggers too.
Manual copy of the structure with key- and identity-attributes and
triggers causes new problems when the replication is active (i.e. a
replication insert datas in a table with a trigger, the trigger on the
master takes effect, the replication tries to copy the effected datas,
but the trigger on the slave already work with the datas).

Actual way is a differential copy periodical from master to slave, but
is not nice and just a periodical actual slave.

Any ideas for more solutions?

PS: Sorry for X-Post, but i'm not sure, if there are "active" reader of

Thanks & Greets

Marko Damaschke

trainee at T-Systems-MMS GmbH, Dresden, Saxony, Germany

student of applied computer science at Chemnitz University of Technology
Jul 20 '05 #1
Share this question for a faster answer!
Share on Google+

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.