Replication over firewalls

Hi
Can anyone tell me if you need the same registry entry as
in 6.5 for replication over firewalls for 7.0?
Ref -Microsoft Knowledge base article 164667.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;164667&Product=sql
Thanks
I believe the authentication mechanism has changed. Its now RPC over tcp/ip
or netbios, and using the distrib_admin account.
The accounts are authenticated at the application level - using the
distrib.exe, snapshot.exe, and replmerge.exe components.
"Sarel Theron" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2c9e01c42871$c13f67b0$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> Can anyone tell me if you need the same registry entry as
> in 6.5 for replication over firewalls for 7.0?
> Ref -Microsoft Knowledge base article 164667.
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
> us;164667&Product=sql
> Thanks

Replication of Stored Procedures

Mike,
if you are using transactional replication, have a look at
the article properties for the stored procedure. There is
the option to replicate execution of the stored procedure.
AFAIR by default this is not done, so the stored procedure
itself (rows in sysobjects and syscomments etc) is
replicated. Changes to the stored procedure TSQL are not
replicated in the future, as this would be replication of
system table data which we can't yet do.
Replication of the execution of the stored procedure and
the rows affected are 2 separate issues and have no
overlap.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
Hi, Paul. Thanks for responding.
Maybe I need to restate my question.
Actually the execution of the SP and the rows affected was my question.
In particular, if a table is being replicated and a stored procedure that
inserts, updates, deletes rows from that same table is replicated, how does
replication know only to execute the SP and not to transfer the rows
affected by the execution of the SP?
So, for example, if a developer inserts 8,000 records into a replicated
table via a stored procedure, I don't want the 8,000 rows to be transferred
to the subscriber, but rather the "EXEC" statement.
Any idea if/how replication handles this?
Thanks again,
Mike
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:1d6701c46fd0$e2744d50$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Mike,
> if you are using transactional replication, have a look at
> the article properties for the stored procedure. There is
> the option to replicate execution of the stored procedure.
> AFAIR by default this is not done, so the stored procedure
> itself (rows in sysobjects and syscomments etc) is
> replicated. Changes to the stored procedure TSQL are not
> replicated in the future, as this would be replication of
> system table data which we can't yet do.
> Replication of the execution of the stored procedure and
> the rows affected are 2 separate issues and have no
> overlap.
> HTH,
> Paul Ibison
|||I'm not sure how it knows, but it knows!
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Mike" <MichaelLopez@.inds.com> wrote in message
news:OplHRT$bEHA.2940@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi, Paul. Thanks for responding.
> Maybe I need to restate my question.
> Actually the execution of the SP and the rows affected was my question.
> In particular, if a table is being replicated and a stored procedure that
> inserts, updates, deletes rows from that same table is replicated, how
does
> replication know only to execute the SP and not to transfer the rows
> affected by the execution of the SP?
> So, for example, if a developer inserts 8,000 records into a replicated
> table via a stored procedure, I don't want the 8,000 rows to be
transferred
> to the subscriber, but rather the "EXEC" statement.
> Any idea if/how replication handles this?
> Thanks again,
> Mike
> "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
> news:1d6701c46fd0$e2744d50$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>
|||So, then the answer to the "If" part is "Yes, the EXEC command is
transferred, not the changed rows", and in that case the "How" part really
is irrelevant.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilaryk@.att.net> wrote in message
news:%23cHgXRFcEHA.3792@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I'm not sure how it knows, but it knows!
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>
> "Mike" <MichaelLopez@.inds.com> wrote in message
> news:OplHRT$bEHA.2940@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
that
> does
> transferred
>

Replication of indexes, triggers, constraints in MS SQL Server 200

Hi,
Is there any better means of replicating table indexes, triggers, and
constraints than simply reinitializing the article everytime their
definitions change or a new one is added? This is in Microsoft SQL Server
2000 SP3.
Many thanks,
Oskar
sp_addscriptexec
It only works for subscribers deployed via a UNC.
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
"Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:469DF5DA-6394-477E-B8DD-915E0E48072A@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> Is there any better means of replicating table indexes, triggers, and
> constraints than simply reinitializing the article everytime their
> definitions change or a new one is added? This is in Microsoft SQL Server
> 2000 SP3.
> --
> Many thanks,
> Oskar
>

replication issue

need to set up replication with a distributor - does anyone know a good
article on how to do this ?
when i publish the articles, how do I like the subscriber to the publisher
when there is a distributor in the middle... do I point to the distributor ?John
Look at these articles
http://www.swynk.com/friends/achigrik/SetupMR.asp -- Setting Up Merge
Replication: A Step by Step Guide
http://www.mssqlcity.com/Articles/Replic/Replic.htm --Setting All
Replica (Step by step)
"John Smith III" <jsmithIII@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eO7B2eVuDHA.3224@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> need to set up replication with a distributor - does anyone know a good
> article on how to do this ?
> when i publish the articles, how do I like the subscriber to the publisher
> when there is a distributor in the middle... do I point to the distributor
?
>

Replication hold on table artcl after its publication had been dro

Pls help with my issue. I have a table that was an article in a publication.
However the publication to which the article belongs had been dropped but I
stoll get the following error message when I try to truncate the table. What
is goin on ?
"Cannot truncate table 'tblContributorRole' because it is published for
replication."
There is a stored procedure to do this called sp_MSunmarkreplinfo which
takes a tablename as a parameter. Alternatively, setting replinfo to 0 in
sysobjects for the particular table should do it. Finally, running
sp_removedbreplication can be used to remove all traces of replication in
the subscriber database, but obviously must only be done if this database is
not also configured as a publisher.
Rgds,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)