I've been told that SQL Server replication is buggy and unreliable

Hi, I've recently been told that SQL Server replication is buggy and unreliable. I find this very hard to believe. I'm working with a subcontractor in another state that is hosting a large DB for us. I want to replicate a read-only copy of the DB over
the internetl to our local site. They also tell me that it is difficult to recover when there is a problem with replication. I again find this hard to believe. The worst case it to re-snapshot.
I've been working with SQL Server since 2002, but not replication. I've found SQL Server to be very reliable and nice to work with.
I would greatly appreciate honest feedback.
Thanks very much,
Griff
Griff,
I've used it for 4 years and found it to be robust. I teach replication to
financial staff in London and it is widely used by insurance companies and
banks, which might make you feel more confident about its usefulness.
To be honest, almost always what I initially thought was a limitation in the
technology actually turned out to be me using the wrong implementation, or
not being aware of existing workarounds.
For someone getting started, BOL (and Hilary's upcoming books) should
provide the foundation needed to make correct choices. For troubleshooting
I'd advise anyone starting out to implement replication in as many different
ways as possible, see when you've broken it and then research this newsgroup
thoroughly.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
Also, I keep a scratchpad of errors/solutions I've seen, or read about and
tested at www.replicationanswers.com.
|||Griff,
I've used it for 4 years and found it to be robust. I teach replication to
financial staff in London and it is widely used by insurance companies and
banks, which might make you feel more confident about its usefulness.
To be honest, almost always what I initially thought was a limitation in the
technology actually turned out to be me using the wrong implementation, or
not being aware of existing workarounds.
For someone getting started, BOL (and Hilary's upcoming books) should
provide the foundation needed to make correct choices. For troubleshooting
I'd advise anyone starting out to implement replication in as many different
ways as possible, see when you've broken it and then research this newsgroup
thoroughly.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
Also, I keep a scratchpad of errors/solutions I've seen, or read about and
tested at www.replicationanswers.com.
|||Replication is not buggy per se.
the problem with replication is that it is depenedent on often reliable
links. Sometimes a LAN connection which is good enough for day to day use,
will turn out to be too unreliable or unstable for replication.
Replication is resilient to many errors, but not a poor connection.
Its akin to someone taking a gravel road and complaining about the car.
Another problem with replication is that it is a complex product that few
dba's really understand well.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:eI8AqChXEHA.384@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Griff,
> I've used it for 4 years and found it to be robust. I teach replication to
> financial staff in London and it is widely used by insurance companies and
> banks, which might make you feel more confident about its usefulness.
> To be honest, almost always what I initially thought was a limitation in
the
> technology actually turned out to be me using the wrong implementation, or
> not being aware of existing workarounds.
> For someone getting started, BOL (and Hilary's upcoming books) should
> provide the foundation needed to make correct choices. For troubleshooting
> I'd advise anyone starting out to implement replication in as many
different
> ways as possible, see when you've broken it and then research this
newsgroup
> thoroughly.
> HTH,
> Paul Ibison
> Also, I keep a scratchpad of errors/solutions I've seen, or read about and
> tested at www.replicationanswers.com.
>
|||Replication is not buggy per se.
the problem with replication is that it is depenedent on often reliable
links. Sometimes a LAN connection which is good enough for day to day use,
will turn out to be too unreliable or unstable for replication.
Replication is resilient to many errors, but not a poor connection.
Its akin to someone taking a gravel road and complaining about the car.
Another problem with replication is that it is a complex product that few
dba's really understand well.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:eI8AqChXEHA.384@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Griff,
> I've used it for 4 years and found it to be robust. I teach replication to
> financial staff in London and it is widely used by insurance companies and
> banks, which might make you feel more confident about its usefulness.
> To be honest, almost always what I initially thought was a limitation in
the
> technology actually turned out to be me using the wrong implementation, or
> not being aware of existing workarounds.
> For someone getting started, BOL (and Hilary's upcoming books) should
> provide the foundation needed to make correct choices. For troubleshooting
> I'd advise anyone starting out to implement replication in as many
different
> ways as possible, see when you've broken it and then research this
newsgroup
> thoroughly.
> HTH,
> Paul Ibison
> Also, I keep a scratchpad of errors/solutions I've seen, or read about and
> tested at www.replicationanswers.com.
>