Merge rplication - records not being replicated.

We are replicating 5 subscriptions to 500 users with MSDE databases. All
databases are SQL Server 2000 SP4.
The issue we are seeing is that some users are not seeing all the records
they should. (Merge replication) Examples:
User A creates some new records. The records get replicated to the server
and then are not in user A's database (they should still be in the users
database). There are no conflicts. Re-building the snap shot and
re-initializing with the upload changes selected does not fix the issue.
Re-building the snap shot and re-initializing with the upload changes Not
selected does fix the issue.
Any suggestions for tracking this proble down would be appreciated.
Are you using any dynamic filters? If the added rows on A are not allowed
according to the filter, the row is outside of the partition and this could
account for such behaviour.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Paul,
We are using dynamic filters. The users are only allowed to add records
that are in the partition.
|||Then this is normal behaviour.
It would help if you explain a little more about what you would like to
happen.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)

Merge Replication Misses Table

I have set up merge replication between two databases and I consistently
fail to get any records updated in one of the tables.
Basically I have a one way push subscription from server A to Server B.
Every table gets replicated except for one which never copies any records. I
can't see anything about this particular table that looks different to any
of the others
Does any one have any ideas?
Regards
Ian
Does anything show up in the conflict viewer for this table?
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
"Ian Cox" <Ian1971@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
news:%236IBthweFHA.1504@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> I have set up merge replication between two databases and I consistently
> fail to get any records updated in one of the tables.
> Basically I have a one way push subscription from server A to Server B.
> Every table gets replicated except for one which never copies any records.
I
> can't see anything about this particular table that looks different to any
> of the others
> Does any one have any ideas?
> Regards
> Ian
>
|||No. Nothing in the conflict viewer
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:usCxAlweFHA.3184@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Does anything show up in the conflict viewer for this table?
> --
> 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
> "Ian Cox" <Ian1971@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
> news:%236IBthweFHA.1504@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
records.[vbcol=seagreen]
> I
any
>
|||Hello,
You may refer to the following articles to troubleshoot the issue:
315521 INF: How to Troubleshoot SQL Server Merge Replication Problems
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=315521
Review SQL Server error logs to check if there is any related error.
Default folder is C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\LOG
I hope the information is helpful.
Sophie Guo
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
================================================== ===
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||I've gone through the article you suggested and checked the logs but nothing
seems to apply to my situation.
There are no conflicts and nothing to indicate a problem in the logs
I have taken the step to completely rebuild the publication and see if that
helps.
It seems to be ok now, but I will keep an eye on the situation to make sure
the data is being replicated ok by validating the data at the subscriber as
indicated in the article you mentioned.
Thanks
Ian
"Sophie Guo [MSFT]" <v-sguo@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:P2pVIQ8eFHA.3404@.TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> You may refer to the following articles to troubleshoot the issue:
> 315521 INF: How to Troubleshoot SQL Server Merge Replication Problems
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=315521
> Review SQL Server error logs to check if there is any related error.
> Default folder is C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\LOG
> I hope the information is helpful.
> Sophie Guo
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> ================================================== ===
> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
> ================================================== ===
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
>
>
|||I still have the same problem. I have rechecked the knowledge base article
and gone through all the steps.
I enabled validation and logging. As expected it now fails the validation
check. The log doesn't reveal anything.
I am stumped on this one.
Any ideas?
"Ian Cox" <Ian1971@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
news:OGdnSq%23eFHA.1448@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> I've gone through the article you suggested and checked the logs but
nothing
> seems to apply to my situation.
> There are no conflicts and nothing to indicate a problem in the logs
> I have taken the step to completely rebuild the publication and see if
that
> helps.
> It seems to be ok now, but I will keep an eye on the situation to make
sure
> the data is being replicated ok by validating the data at the subscriber
as
> indicated in the article you mentioned.
> Thanks
> Ian
> "Sophie Guo [MSFT]" <v-sguo@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:P2pVIQ8eFHA.3404@.TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl...
> rights.
>
|||Hello,
You may need to perform the following steps to narroe down the issue:
1. Perform the following command before you insert a new record via trigger
on the publication database
use <publication dabatbase>
select * from msmerge_contents
2. Insert a new record on the problem table
3. Run above command again to see if a new line appears
If new line appears in msmerge_contents when inserting a new record, please
refer to the following article to enable merge replication
agent, and then send log file to me
312292 HOW TO: Enable Replication Agents for Logging to Output Files in SQL
Server
<http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;EN-US;312292>
If a new line does not appear, please check if the triggers are added
properly by merge replication setup process:
Right-click the problem table->All tasks->Manage triggers and make sure
insert/delete/update triggers are listed properly.
If the above triggers do not exist, please run following command to make
sure the article has the same features as other articles:
select * from sysmergearticles
I look forward to hearing from you.
Sophie Guo
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
================================================== ===
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||Thanks for the info Sophie.
A record does appear in msmerge_contents.
I have already enabled agent logging as indicated in that article.
The logs don't seem to reveal much though
I basically see something like this (server names and DB names changed)
...
[7/1/2005 2:00:25 AM]SubscriptionServer.MyDB: {call sp_MSgetversion }
Percent Complete: 60
Processing article 'Language'
Percent Complete: 80
Processing article 'Supplier'
Percent Complete: 80
Downloaded 5 data changes (5 inserts, 0 updates, 0 deletes, 0 conflicts).
<Note the 5 inserts were all related to the Supplier table - the Language
table should be showing 98 inserts on top of that>
Percent Complete: 80
Validating article 'Territory'
Connecting to Subscriber 'SubscriptionServer.MyDB'
...
Percent Complete: 0
Article 'Language' failed data validation (rowcount only).Article 'Language'
failed data validation (rowcount only).
...
It seems like it doesn't spot any differences between the Language table at
the publisher and subsriber when replicating. When there clearly are changes
Any other ideas?
"Sophie Guo [MSFT]" <v-sguo@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:OcLUDShfFHA.3480@.TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> You may need to perform the following steps to narroe down the issue:
> 1. Perform the following command before you insert a new record via
trigger
> on the publication database
> use <publication dabatbase>
> select * from msmerge_contents
> 2. Insert a new record on the problem table
> 3. Run above command again to see if a new line appears
> If new line appears in msmerge_contents when inserting a new record,
please
> refer to the following article to enable merge replication
> agent, and then send log file to me
> 312292 HOW TO: Enable Replication Agents for Logging to Output Files in
SQL
> Server
> <http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;EN-US;312292>
> If a new line does not appear, please check if the triggers are added
> properly by merge replication setup process:
> Right-click the problem table->All tasks->Manage triggers and make sure
> insert/delete/update triggers are listed properly.
> If the above triggers do not exist, please run following command to make
> sure the article has the same features as other articles:
> select * from sysmergearticles
> I look forward to hearing from you.
> Sophie Guo
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> ================================================== ===
> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
> ================================================== ===
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
>
|||Hello,
I find the following articles address similar issue:
309400 FIX: Merge Replication Non-Convergence Fixes in SQL Server 2000 SP2
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=309400
304222 FIX: Merge Replication Non-Convergence Occurs with Local Subscribers
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=304222
Please install the latest hotfix to resolve the issue:
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 4
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...C8D-C20E-4446-
99A9-B7F0213F8BC5&displaylang=en#filelist
Or you can perform the workaround to narrow down the issue.
I hope the information is helpful.
Sophie Guo
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
================================================== ===
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||Hi Sophie,
Thanks for those articles. They do sounds like the symptoms I am
experiencing, but the cases described are not quite the same. We are already
on SP3 so 390400 doesn't seem to apply and the table in question has less
than 32 columns so 304222 doesn't seem to apply.
I am going to find out if we can install SP4 to see if that makes any
difference
Regards
Ian
"Sophie Guo [MSFT]" <v-sguo@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:w4I7MOGgFHA.1184@.TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> I find the following articles address similar issue:
> 309400 FIX: Merge Replication Non-Convergence Fixes in SQL Server 2000 SP2
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=309400
> 304222 FIX: Merge Replication Non-Convergence Occurs with Local
Subscribers
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=304222
> Please install the latest hotfix to resolve the issue:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 4
>
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...C8D-C20E-4446-
> 99A9-B7F0213F8BC5&displaylang=en#filelist
> Or you can perform the workaround to narrow down the issue.
> I hope the information is helpful.
> Sophie Guo
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> ================================================== ===
> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
> ================================================== ===
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
>
>
>

Merge replication is deleting records

I have a merge replication of some tables between two servers. Something
curious happens. When I insert a register in a table in one database, then I
wait and the other table in the database doesn't update the new register and
I refresh the view in my original database and the record I inserted is not
there anymore. Is like when I added the record he found that is not in the
other site so he thinks he should delete it instead of inserting in the
other site. Why this happens? Is it a bug of replication?
This is scaring me because the same problem in this lilte table is happening
in a master table where I keep inventory, by some reason sometimes (not very
often) a record is being deleted and I sopposed is for the replication
because the process inserts the record in one place and then he finds that
this record is not in the other place and instead of inserting he deletes
the record.
Please help me because I can't miss any of this records, what can I do, how
can I trace what happened? I created a trigger for delete that inserts in a
new table every time a register is being deleted in this master table and he
inserted the deleted record in this table but how can I trace how was
deleted?
Please help me with this replication problem
Thanks in advance
Jennyfer
Jennyfer ,
do you have filters on the publication?
This scenario could occur if the record doesn't satisfy the filter, so an
insert on the subscriber will be uploaded then downloaded as a delete.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
|||I don't have any filters
Thanks
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:%23e$%231fBdEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Jennyfer ,
> do you have filters on the publication?
> This scenario could occur if the record doesn't satisfy the filter, so an
> insert on the subscriber will be uploaded then downloaded as a delete.
> HTH,
> Paul Ibison
>
|||Would it be the case that this insert violates some constraint (PK, FK,
check, etc) at the subscriber?
Hope that helps
--Mahesh
[ This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
rights. ]
"Jennyfer J Barco" <pdwhitt@.nospam.wdsinc.com> wrote in message
news:urTZBYCdEHA.3728@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I don't have any filters
> Thanks
> "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
> news:%23e$%231fBdEHA.4092@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
an
>
|||To find out a bit more info you might want to...
To see who is doing the delete...select publisher_insertcount,
publisher_updatecount, publisher_deletecount,
subscriber_insertcount, subscriber_updatecount, subscriber_deletecount
from dbo.MSmerge_history
Run profiler on the publisher and subscriber to see why/how the delete is
being done.
Check the conflict viewer to see if any conflicts are registered.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
|||Thanks so much for the constraint idea (PK, FK...) I have a FOREIGN KEY in
the master table that the product register should exists in another table
wich is beign replicated too. It looks that he tryed to insert the master
register and the other table was not replicated yet so the error in the
confict_Mergename_mastertable table says that the insert in the other site
conflicted with the FOREIGN KEY and my records that were deleted are in this
table. The thing is, if there is a problem like this and SQL can't insert
the register in the other site but should not delete the record in my site
where it was originated inserted. Is there any settings where I can say that
if an insert error comes don't delete the original record just write in this
log table that the record was not replicated. Please give me an idea and
thanks so much for you help and tips
Jennyfer
"Mahesh [MSFT]" <maheshrd@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eClCOeEdEHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Would it be the case that this insert violates some constraint (PK, FK,
> check, etc) at the subscriber?
> Hope that helps
> --Mahesh
> [ This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
> rights. ]
> "Jennyfer J Barco" <pdwhitt@.nospam.wdsinc.com> wrote in message
> news:urTZBYCdEHA.3728@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> an
>
|||One thing that caused this was because the replication stopped wth no reason
in the weekend and then we started again. It looks thar SQL trys to insert
all the transactions that were not inserted while it was stopped and in this
there is no order or priority with the tables( maybe he sorts
alphabeticaly). May I define a priority so always when I start synchronizing
the outer reference tables comes first? May I select the order of the tables
in which I want the replication to start?
Thanks so much
"Jennyfer J Barco" <pdwhitt@.nospam.wdsinc.com> wrote in message
news:u8V6DXMdEHA.3728@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks so much for the constraint idea (PK, FK...) I have a FOREIGN KEY in
> the master table that the product register should exists in another table
> wich is beign replicated too. It looks that he tryed to insert the master
> register and the other table was not replicated yet so the error in the
> confict_Mergename_mastertable table says that the insert in the other site
> conflicted with the FOREIGN KEY and my records that were deleted are in
this
> table. The thing is, if there is a problem like this and SQL can't insert
> the register in the other site but should not delete the record in my site
> where it was originated inserted. Is there any settings where I can say
that
> if an insert error comes don't delete the original record just write in
this[vbcol=seagreen]
> log table that the record was not replicated. Please give me an idea and
> thanks so much for you help and tips
> Jennyfer
> "Mahesh [MSFT]" <maheshrd@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eClCOeEdEHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
so[vbcol=seagreen]
delete.
>
|||Basically you are running into the compensate_for_errors problem.
This problem is that if a change from publisher (say) fails to get applied
at the subscriber (for some reason, PK,FK,CHECK,etc constraints) it undoes
the change at the publisher. So a insert from publisher when fails at the
subscriber gets deleted at the publisher too. Similary a delete from
publisher when fails at the subscriber, it gets re-inserted at the
publisher.
The KB article for that is here:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=sql2k
This is fixed in a QFE and please contact PSS for the QFE.
Hope that helps
--Mahesh
[ This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
rights. ]
"Jennyfer J Barco" <pdwhitt@.nospam.wdsinc.com> wrote in message
news:u8V6DXMdEHA.3728@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Thanks so much for the constraint idea (PK, FK...) I have a FOREIGN KEY in
> the master table that the product register should exists in another table
> wich is beign replicated too. It looks that he tryed to insert the master
> register and the other table was not replicated yet so the error in the
> confict_Mergename_mastertable table says that the insert in the other site
> conflicted with the FOREIGN KEY and my records that were deleted are in
this
> table. The thing is, if there is a problem like this and SQL can't insert
> the register in the other site but should not delete the record in my site
> where it was originated inserted. Is there any settings where I can say
that
> if an insert error comes don't delete the original record just write in
this[vbcol=seagreen]
> log table that the record was not replicated. Please give me an idea and
> thanks so much for you help and tips
> Jennyfer
> "Mahesh [MSFT]" <maheshrd@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eClCOeEdEHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
so[vbcol=seagreen]
delete.
>
|||Don't forget this:
One thing that caused this was because the replication stopped wth no reason
in the weekend and then we started again. It looks thar SQL trys to insert
all the transactions that were not inserted while it was stopped and in this
there is no order or priority with the tables( maybe he sorts
alphabeticaly). May I define a priority so always when I start synchronizing
the outer reference tables comes first? May I select the order of the tables
in which I want the replication to start?
Thanks so much
"Mahesh [MSFT]" <maheshrd@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Yz$O9MdEHA.1692@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Basically you are running into the compensate_for_errors problem.
> This problem is that if a change from publisher (say) fails to get applied
> at the subscriber (for some reason, PK,FK,CHECK,etc constraints) it undoes
> the change at the publisher. So a insert from publisher when fails at the
> subscriber gets deleted at the publisher too. Similary a delete from
> publisher when fails at the subscriber, it gets re-inserted at the
> publisher.
> The KB article for that is here:
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=sql2k[vbcol=seagreen]
> This is fixed in a QFE and please contact PSS for the QFE.
> Hope that helps
> --Mahesh
> [ This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
> rights. ]
> "Jennyfer J Barco" <pdwhitt@.nospam.wdsinc.com> wrote in message
> news:u8V6DXMdEHA.3728@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
in[vbcol=seagreen]
table[vbcol=seagreen]
master[vbcol=seagreen]
site[vbcol=seagreen]
> this
insert[vbcol=seagreen]
site[vbcol=seagreen]
> that
> this
FK,[vbcol=seagreen]
filter,
> so
> delete.
>
|||You cannot specify the processing order in SQL Server 2000.
There is a possibility as you say that some changes could go before the
others that can cause this kind of conflicting behavior.
However if the PKs and FKs were defined as NOT FOR REPLICATION then probably
you would not have hit this error.
Or had there been merge filters between the articles, probably they would
have been enumerated in the proper order too.
So what is the current state? Has it synched up now?
If you make any inserts to tables at the publisher do you see them
propagated to the subscriber?
Hope that helps
--Mahesh
[ This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no
rights. ]
"Jennyfer J Barco" <pdwhitt@.nospam.wdsinc.com> wrote in message
news:uxUYZaOdEHA.3632@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Don't forget this:
> One thing that caused this was because the replication stopped wth no
reason
> in the weekend and then we started again. It looks thar SQL trys to insert
> all the transactions that were not inserted while it was stopped and in
this
> there is no order or priority with the tables( maybe he sorts
> alphabeticaly). May I define a priority so always when I start
synchronizing
> the outer reference tables comes first? May I select the order of the
tables[vbcol=seagreen]
> in which I want the replication to start?
> Thanks so much
> "Mahesh [MSFT]" <maheshrd@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Yz$O9MdEHA.1692@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
applied[vbcol=seagreen]
undoes[vbcol=seagreen]
the
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=sql2k[vbcol=seagreen]
KEY[vbcol=seagreen]
> in
> table
> master
the[vbcol=seagreen]
> site
in[vbcol=seagreen]
> insert
> site
say[vbcol=seagreen]
in[vbcol=seagreen]
and
> FK,
> filter,
>

Merge replication ignores some records

Pls advise,
i use merge replication as pull, in replication data including some image
data.
Few records are just ignored and they do not appear in subscriber database,
what i can do to make the databases fully synchronized?
Mndr
How are you inserting the image data? If you are using the WRITETEXT and
UPDATETEXT, you will have to create a trigger that will update the row for
merge replication to pick up these changes/updates.
Also are you doing any form of filtering? Sometimes you filters will not
resolve correctly.
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
"Malgorzata Ndreu" <mndreu@.maritweb.com> wrote in message
news:uj%23CXFhLFHA.3512@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Pls advise,
> i use merge replication as pull, in replication data including some image
> data.
> Few records are just ignored and they do not appear in subscriber
database,
> what i can do to make the databases fully synchronized?
> Mndr
>
|||We have this same issue but belive it is related to snapshot creation every
night. If a user downloads a new snapshot and fails to syncronize before a
new snapshot is created, the changes to the database between snapshots will
not replicate to the to the user. What causes this?
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OVLbUsiLFHA.2648@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> How are you inserting the image data? If you are using the WRITETEXT and
> UPDATETEXT, you will have to create a trigger that will update the row for
> merge replication to pick up these changes/updates.
> Also are you doing any form of filtering? Sometimes you filters will not
> resolve correctly.
> --
> 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
> "Malgorzata Ndreu" <mndreu@.maritweb.com> wrote in message
> news:uj%23CXFhLFHA.3512@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> database,
>
|||The snapshot might be created each night, but it will only be sent to
subscribers who are new or who require an reinitialization. It is unlikely
that this is your problem.
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
"Fast Eddie" <e@.bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:52o0e.74802$%Y4.50101@.bignews6.bellsouth.net. ..
> We have this same issue but belive it is related to snapshot creation
every
> night. If a user downloads a new snapshot and fails to syncronize before
a
> new snapshot is created, the changes to the database between snapshots
will[vbcol=seagreen]
> not replicate to the to the user. What causes this?
>
> "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OVLbUsiLFHA.2648@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
for[vbcol=seagreen]
image
>

Merge Replication and Multiple Record UPDATE statements

We have a database in which global updates must be periodically made to
multiple records, usually in the hundreds or thousands.
Is this a problem when using Merge replication? Because there are individual
merge triggers on each table, is it preferable to use a cursor to make global
changes?
Also, when using View Conflicts feature, is it safe to assume that record
listed as the winner has already been replicated to all locations? If so, why
does one have to click on either the Keep Winning Change or the Resolve With
This Data button?
Is there a way to globally accept all winning changes?
The global update will take far longer with merge replication. A cursor
solution might offer better performance.
Regarding the conflict viewer, it is safe to assume that the conflict has
been resolved with the publisher and one subscriber. It might then conflict
with another subscriber, so you can't assume it has been resolved
everywhere.
The keep winning change button and the resolve with this data buttons allow
you to clear the conflict (in other words accept it) or roll it back and let
the subscribers change win.
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
"elpepe" <elpepe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D5C598DA-05F0-4F98-A869-DA53D058D628@.microsoft.com...
> We have a database in which global updates must be periodically made to
> multiple records, usually in the hundreds or thousands.
> Is this a problem when using Merge replication? Because there are
> individual
> merge triggers on each table, is it preferable to use a cursor to make
> global
> changes?
> Also, when using View Conflicts feature, is it safe to assume that record
> listed as the winner has already been replicated to all locations? If so,
> why
> does one have to click on either the Keep Winning Change or the Resolve
> With
> This Data button?
> Is there a way to globally accept all winning changes?
|||Thanks -- that's very helpful.
There are hundreds of conflicts that remain. Is there a way to globally
accept the winner so that the conflicts are resolved everywhere?
Also, will you be writing a book on Merge replication anytime soon?
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> The global update will take far longer with merge replication. A cursor
> solution might offer better performance.
> Regarding the conflict viewer, it is safe to assume that the conflict has
> been resolved with the publisher and one subscriber. It might then conflict
> with another subscriber, so you can't assume it has been resolved
> everywhere.
> The keep winning change button and the resolve with this data buttons allow
> you to clear the conflict (in other words accept it) or roll it back and let
> the subscribers change win.
> --
> 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
>
> "elpepe" <elpepe@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D5C598DA-05F0-4F98-A869-DA53D058D628@.microsoft.com...
>
>

Merge replication after a restore publisher

Merge replication works fine, but if I restore publisher database on SQL
Server 2000,
and I have some records in SQL Server CE database was already merged (after
last backup),
when I synchronize, these records exists on SQL Server CE, but they are lost
on
SQL Server 2000.
I have to put these records on SQL Server 2000, but how can I compare
records that are
both on SQL Server 2000 and SQL Server CE ?
Thanks.
You can update these records in the SQL CE database again, and they should
replicate to back to the publisher the next time you run the activeX
program.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Now available on Amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/off...?condition=all
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"El Ricoun" <elricoun@.yahoo.fr> wrote in message
news:4207ca97$0$6615$8fcfb975@.news.wanadoo.fr...
> Merge replication works fine, but if I restore publisher database on SQL
> Server 2000,
> and I have some records in SQL Server CE database was already merged
(after
> last backup),
> when I synchronize, these records exists on SQL Server CE, but they are
lost
> on
> SQL Server 2000.
> I have to put these records on SQL Server 2000, but how can I compare
> records that are
> both on SQL Server 2000 and SQL Server CE ?
> Thanks.
>
|||Ok, thanks, it works fine, but I have to update all records of all tables
on SQL Server CE. Is it possible to use s_Generation column to know
which record that I have to update ?
Thanks.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cotter@.gmail.com> a crit dans le message de
news:egF1ekZDFHA.936@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> You can update these records in the SQL CE database again, and they should
> replicate to back to the publisher the next time you run the activeX
> program.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Now available on Amazon.com
>
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/off...?condition=all
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
> "El Ricoun" <elricoun@.yahoo.fr> wrote in message
> news:4207ca97$0$6615$8fcfb975@.news.wanadoo.fr...
> (after
> lost
>