Replication scenario question...Merge or Transactional?

The situation I am faced with is we have a web application supported by a SQL
2000(sp4) database that resides on a limited bandwidth network. Our
distributed users are constantly complaining of "slow" response times. Our
local users have no such complaints. Some of our leadership has suggested
sending a SQL server/IIS server to the remote location and using some type of
replication to synchronize the data between these boxes. The requirements
are for minimal latency and concurrent updating of data. The leadership also
want this solution to be completely automated (little or no supervision of
the replication process) and as with everything we do they want it right away
(we're talking days, not weeks). I am very new to replication and have read
through the BOL section and am in the process of reading Hillary Cotter's
book. I am leaning toward an implementation of Merge Replication but I am
unsure if this is the right solution. Any advice or informed opinions would
be greatly appreciated.
There is no concurrent replication option ie each solution will have a degree
of latency. If you use merge then you can select from a variety of conflict
resolvers and easily work offline. This might be your best option. There are
alternatives - queued updating subscribers, immediate updating subscribers
and bidirectional transactional replication. Do you have BLOBS in the table?
Are the subscribers always connected? Should they be able to continue if not
connected? These questions will clarify and narrow down the options a bit.
Whichever option you select, don't rush - you'll need time to configure it in
a test environment to establish a set of protocols (change management, error
handling...) and to simply verify that it all works for your situation.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
"Dave Stokes" wrote:

> The situation I am faced with is we have a web application supported by a SQL
> 2000(sp4) database that resides on a limited bandwidth network. Our
> distributed users are constantly complaining of "slow" response times. Our
> local users have no such complaints. Some of our leadership has suggested
> sending a SQL server/IIS server to the remote location and using some type of
> replication to synchronize the data between these boxes. The requirements
> are for minimal latency and concurrent updating of data. The leadership also
> want this solution to be completely automated (little or no supervision of
> the replication process) and as with everything we do they want it right away
> (we're talking days, not weeks). I am very new to replication and have read
> through the BOL section and am in the process of reading Hillary Cotter's
> book. I am leaning toward an implementation of Merge Replication but I am
> unsure if this is the right solution. Any advice or informed opinions would
> be greatly appreciated.

Replication Performance -- Many publishers, 1 subscriber

I have a situation where I need about 50 client machines that are
collecting data to synchronize with a network server on our local 100
Mbps LAN. Am running SQL Server Enterprise 2000 on the back end.
Have experimented with using MSDE on the client machines and using
merge replication with a push subscription to the server. Everything
seems to work good on a single client, but I'm wondering:
- How does this scale? Is it realistic to think I can do this with 50
machines?
- Locking implications. Since this is an automated process, The
ability to have real-time inserts needs to be always available
Typically happens 1 - 2 times per minute. (Updates can be handled
through standard error handling since a human operator is involved.)
- As time goes by and table sizes increase would this slow down, even
if the primary activity on the table is the addition of records?
Thanks in advance.
Mike
Mike,
I would say it is preferable to have a single publisher on the main server
and multiple push subscribers for this topology.
I'm not sure what your separation of inserts and updates is for - could you
explain a little further.
Inserts shouldn't cause any locking contention. For contention of resources,
you could stagger the synchronization, and limit the number of concurrent
merge processes.
Increasing table size for inserts should be no problem. You'll have a
gradual increase in metadata, which will be removed automatically though.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
|||do you need bi-directional replication? From what you describe you have
selected merge, where if you don't need bi-directional replication you can
get away with transactional which will offer better performance.
"Mike Von Stein" <mvonstein@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c92d1754.0405070936.fcab9ad@.posting.google.co m...
> I have a situation where I need about 50 client machines that are
> collecting data to synchronize with a network server on our local 100
> Mbps LAN. Am running SQL Server Enterprise 2000 on the back end.
> Have experimented with using MSDE on the client machines and using
> merge replication with a push subscription to the server. Everything
> seems to work good on a single client, but I'm wondering:
> - How does this scale? Is it realistic to think I can do this with 50
> machines?
> - Locking implications. Since this is an automated process, The
> ability to have real-time inserts needs to be always available
> Typically happens 1 - 2 times per minute. (Updates can be handled
> through standard error handling since a human operator is involved.)
> - As time goes by and table sizes increase would this slow down, even
> if the primary activity on the table is the addition of records?
> Thanks in advance.
> Mike
|||Paul-
Thanks for the info. It was helpful. The reason I was pursuing this
topology is because the clients are the ones collecting the data.
Which need to be warehoused in a central place. (There is also
static setup data that is coming one way from the server, which I'm
doing exactly what you describe.)
The inserts and updates separation issue is because some of the data
comes automatically from the machine while another, different type of
data, data comes from the operator. It's stored in separate tables in
MSDE. The person's data can be corrected by the person to fix
mistakes. The machine data "never makes mistakes" (or at least it
doesn't know it does) so it's only an insert operation.
Thanks again,
Mike
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message news:<#vLI3YGNEHA.1616@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>...
> Mike,
> I would say it is preferable to have a single publisher on the main server
> and multiple push subscribers for this topology.
> I'm not sure what your separation of inserts and updates is for - could you
> explain a little further.
> Inserts shouldn't cause any locking contention. For contention of resources,
> you could stagger the synchronization, and limit the number of concurrent
> merge processes.
> Increasing table size for inserts should be no problem. You'll have a
> gradual increase in metadata, which will be removed automatically though.
> HTH,
> Paul Ibison
|||Hilary-
Thanks for the info. Not sure exactly what you mean by "selected
merge"? Like horizontal selection? You're right. Actually, I don't
need bi-directional replication in this case but, to my knowledge,
MSDE (which is running on the client) doesn't support transactional
and I thought snapshot would be inefficient.
Thanks again,
Mike
mvonstein@.yahoo.com (Mike Von Stein) wrote in message news:<c92d1754.0405070936.fcab9ad@.posting.google.c om>...
> I have a situation where I need about 50 client machines that are
> collecting data to synchronize with a network server on our local 100
> Mbps LAN. Am running SQL Server Enterprise 2000 on the back end.
> Have experimented with using MSDE on the client machines and using
> merge replication with a push subscription to the server. Everything
> seems to work good on a single client, but I'm wondering:
> - How does this scale? Is it realistic to think I can do this with 50
> machines?
> - Locking implications. Since this is an automated process, The
> ability to have real-time inserts needs to be always available
> Typically happens 1 - 2 times per minute. (Updates can be handled
> through standard error handling since a human operator is involved.)
> - As time goes by and table sizes increase would this slow down, even
> if the primary activity on the table is the addition of records?
> Thanks in advance.
> Mike
|||I meant "selected" in the sense of "chosen".
MSDE can be a subscriber to a transactional publication, or a publisher for
merge or snapshot publications. On further reflection I guess this is why
you have selected merge.
I have worked on a topology that used over 60 merge subscribers to a single
publisher, so it is highly scalable.
I have heard about people using merge with over 100 subscribers with no real
problems.
Achieving real time replication with merge is a problem. Set your
pollinginterval to something low - perhaps 10s or so.
"Mike Von Stein" <mvonstein@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c92d1754.0405080525.16417da3@.posting.google.c om...
> Hilary-
> Thanks for the info. Not sure exactly what you mean by "selected
> merge"? Like horizontal selection? You're right. Actually, I don't
> need bi-directional replication in this case but, to my knowledge,
> MSDE (which is running on the client) doesn't support transactional
> and I thought snapshot would be inefficient.
> Thanks again,
> Mike
>
> mvonstein@.yahoo.com (Mike Von Stein) wrote in message
news:<c92d1754.0405070936.fcab9ad@.posting.google.c om>...[vbcol=seagreen]
|||Mike,
as you know either way works, but I'd still choose to use use a central
publisher and multiple subscribers, as the metadata and alerts etc are then
in a central place and maintenance is simpler. For merge, the distinction
between publisher and subscriber is not too relevant if you don't have
conflicts.
Cheers,
Paul
|||Paul-
Okay, I guess I was thinking since the clients would be the primary
information generators, they would be the "Publishers", but I guess
the names shouldn't be taken literally in this case. I think I see
the benefits you are suggesting.
One question though. How does this impact future schema changes?
Would you have to drop all subscriptions remotely at the clients and
recreate? (That's a maintenance concern, since there are so many.)
We're kind of in a "formative" phase here and I'm expecting to have to
do some tweaks...
Thanks,
Mike
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message news:<#of5O$cNEHA.3328@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>...
> Mike,
> as you know either way works, but I'd still choose to use use a central
> publisher and multiple subscribers, as the metadata and alerts etc are then
> in a central place and maintenance is simpler. For merge, the distinction
> between publisher and subscriber is not too relevant if you don't have
> conflicts.
> Cheers,
> Paul
|||Hilary-
The performance info is interesting. Yes, that is why I was talking
about Merge, but maybe I should look at reversing the terminology like
Paul in this thread suggested. Then maybe I could use transactional
with MSDE?
One concern, though, is the whole reason we are doing this is to
buffer the system to handle things such as planned/unplanned,
server/network downtime, etc. (The clients have to be available 24/7,
but not necessarily the server, if that makes sense...) Read in BOL,
that transactional was for a constant connection. In general, this
would be more like a 99.9% constant connection... So not sure what to
think about that...
Thanks,
Mike
"Hilary Cotter" <hilaryk@.att.net> wrote in message news:<O1Ly#gXNEHA.2500@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I meant "selected" in the sense of "chosen".
> MSDE can be a subscriber to a transactional publication, or a publisher for
> merge or snapshot publications. On further reflection I guess this is why
> you have selected merge.
> I have worked on a topology that used over 60 merge subscribers to a single
> publisher, so it is highly scalable.
> I have heard about people using merge with over 100 subscribers with no real
> problems.
> Achieving real time replication with merge is a problem. Set your
> pollinginterval to something low - perhaps 10s or so.
> "Mike Von Stein" <mvonstein@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:c92d1754.0405080525.16417da3@.posting.google.c om...
> news:<c92d1754.0405070936.fcab9ad@.posting.google.c om>...
|||Transaction does not support bi-directional replication through the wizards. You can configure it for bi-directional replication using the replication stored procedures, or you could use queued replication (but it is tuned for less than 10 subscribers whi
ch rules it out in this case) or immediately updating susbcribers (only if your subscribers/publisher are always well connected).
Transactional does support the subscribers going offline, however you are updating the subscribers, so your best option in this case is merge.
Merge also supports having the publisher and susbcribers going offline.
The caveat in this is the more frequently your publisher/subscribers goes off line the greater the chance of having conflicts.
-- Mike Von Stein wrote: --
Hilary-
The performance info is interesting. Yes, that is why I was talking
about Merge, but maybe I should look at reversing the terminology like
Paul in this thread suggested. Then maybe I could use transactional
with MSDE?
One concern, though, is the whole reason we are doing this is to
buffer the system to handle things such as planned/unplanned,
server/network downtime, etc. (The clients have to be available 24/7,
but not necessarily the server, if that makes sense...) Read in BOL,
that transactional was for a constant connection. In general, this
would be more like a 99.9% constant connection... So not sure what to
think about that...
Thanks,
Mike
"Hilary Cotter" <hilaryk@.att.net> wrote in message news:<O1Ly#gXNEHA.2500@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>...[vbcol=seagreen]
> I meant "selected" in the sense of "chosen".
> merge or snapshot publications. On further reflection I guess this is why
> you have selected merge.
> publisher, so it is highly scalable.
> problems.
> pollinginterval to something low - perhaps 10s or so.
> news:c92d1754.0405080525.16417da3@.posting.google.c om...
> news:<c92d1754.0405070936.fcab9ad@.posting.google.c om>...

Replication over the internet problems

I have a situation where a customer has a SQL 2000 database at thier office
location, this is where they do data updates, it replicates to a SQL 2000
server located at a web hosting facility. Problem is there is a new IT guy
at the office location that has done something to the setup so that now the
database does not replicate. When at the office you can see the hosting
facility SQL in SQL Manager but you can not see the SQL server from the
office location in the hosting facility. The SQL ports are open on the
firewall, and we can telnet to the port but it does not replicate and we can
not see the server in SQL Manager from the hosting facility. What should I
look at first?
Lee - check to see that the alias has not been removed - see (iii) here:
http://www.replicationanswers.com/InternetArticle.asp
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
|||I made the change on the ALIAS on the pull network and opened port 21 inbound
on the Push network. Replication seems successful on one Agent but there
seems to be an invalid Column error on the other. I am having the database
guys look at that. But this may have fixed the problem.
Thanks
|||The replication caused issues with the database. What I would like to do now
is remove everything and start from scratch. What things should I look for
first befoer removeing everything?
All we want to replicate is the data only, not schema or anything else.
Thansk.
|||Lee - if you have plain transactional replication using
sp_removedbreplication on the subscriber and dropping the publication at the
publisher should be enough.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
|||Ok. I just got off the phone with Microsoft and I understand a lot now. Now
to test replication here is what we did:
Created a new database on the Publisher and added a table with columns and
data.
We then created a New Publication set. After creating this here is what
happened that has me stumped...
It created the database and the columns, but it did not replicate the data.
It gives and error: Generic Network error.
Some howit seems to be losing connection, maybe? Any ideas?
|||Lee,
I'd enable logging (http://support.microsoft.com/?id=312292) and see if this
gives more info. Also start ping -t before syncing to test connectivity.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com

Replication on snapshot

Hi is that possible to configure replication in the following situation.

server A is built by snap of server B. Because i am able to create publisher on server B but i am unable to create same on server A.

could any one explain the situation, why it is happening this way.

any help is appriciated.

if you are curious what kind of error i got.

TITLE: Publisher Properties

An error occurred connecting to Publisher 'SERVER A'.

For help, click: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?ProdName=Microsoft+SQL+Server&ProdVer=9.00.1399.06&EvtSrc=Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.PubshrPropertiesErrorSR&EvtID=CantConnectToPublisher&LinkId=20476

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

SQL Server replication requires the actual server name to make a connection to the server. Connections through a server alias, IP address, or any other alternate name are not supported. Specify the actual server name, 'SERVER B'. (Replication.Utilities)

BUTTONS:

OK

The @.@.servername is wrong on server A. If you do "SELECT @.@.servername" on Server A, I bet you will see the name of "B". You can do the following to correct it:

exec sp_dropserver 'server B'

exec sp_addserver 'server A', 'local'

Stop and restart the server.

You should be OK now.

Replication Of Tables Not Full Database

Hi,
first let me explain the situation. I hav a database which contains more
than 500 tables ... now we are setting up another server and the requirment
is like i want to replicate the data of 5 tables with the new server. i dont
want to replicate the entire database ... plz guide me for this situation ...
plz dont say NO coz i know that there will be some way to achive this ...
waiuting for ur response ...
thanks in advance
Deepson Thomas
Deepson,
this is possible using replication. Is the flow of data in one direction
only? If so, then transactional replication would almost certainly be the
route to go down. Have a look at the book in my signature below and BOL for
further details.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)

Replication Monitor - Publisher is empty, but my replication is still there and working

I have a wired situation..!
I set up transactional replication on one of my development server (SQL
2000 Dev Edition with sp4).
It is running fine without any issues and all of a sudden, i noticed in
my repication monitor tab under Publisher where I usually see the
publication is empty now.
I do see the snapshot agent, log reader and distribution agent under my
agents inside the replication Monitor. But its usefull to see all 3
agents in one window under publisher before. What happend? Is there any
way to get that inside that monitor? Has someone encountered this
sitation before? Please advise...
After that I tried to create a new set of replication on different
database on the same server and i dont see those either under
Replication Monitor - Publishers...
All it says is (No Items)...
I would appreciate any help to correct this issue... Thanks in advance..
Which account are you using to connect to the EM?
"Query Builder" <querybuilder@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162496955.745756.103220@.e3g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
>I have a wired situation..!
> I set up transactional replication on one of my development server (SQL
> 2000 Dev Edition with sp4).
> It is running fine without any issues and all of a sudden, i noticed in
> my repication monitor tab under Publisher where I usually see the
> publication is empty now.
> I do see the snapshot agent, log reader and distribution agent under my
> agents inside the replication Monitor. But its usefull to see all 3
> agents in one window under publisher before. What happend? Is there any
> way to get that inside that monitor? Has someone encountered this
> sitation before? Please advise...
> After that I tried to create a new set of replication on different
> database on the same server and i dont see those either under
> Replication Monitor - Publishers...
> All it says is (No Items)...
> I would appreciate any help to correct this issue... Thanks in advance..
>
|||I think your subscription has expired and being dropped. Check to see if the
job exists in the jobs folder, it will have a name similar to the
publication.
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
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
"Query Builder" <querybuilder@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162496955.745756.103220@.e3g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
>I have a wired situation..!
> I set up transactional replication on one of my development server (SQL
> 2000 Dev Edition with sp4).
> It is running fine without any issues and all of a sudden, i noticed in
> my repication monitor tab under Publisher where I usually see the
> publication is empty now.
> I do see the snapshot agent, log reader and distribution agent under my
> agents inside the replication Monitor. But its usefull to see all 3
> agents in one window under publisher before. What happend? Is there any
> way to get that inside that monitor? Has someone encountered this
> sitation before? Please advise...
> After that I tried to create a new set of replication on different
> database on the same server and i dont see those either under
> Replication Monitor - Publishers...
> All it says is (No Items)...
> I would appreciate any help to correct this issue... Thanks in advance..
>
|||I am connected thru EM using the SA account. I also have adimin rights
thru windows authentication...
How do I check my subscriptions are expired or not? I created a new
replication for testing and it is also working fine but i dont see the
replication in the replication monitor.. I do see the publications
under the replication--> publication tree...
THanks for all your input. I would apprecate if you can help me figure
this out...! Thanks again
On Nov 3, 6:34 am, "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cot...@.gmail.com> wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I think your subscription has expired and being dropped. Check to see if the
> job exists in the jobs folder, it will have a name similar to the
> publication.
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
> positions, strategies or opinions.
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTShttp://www.indexserverfaq.com
> "Query Builder" <querybuil...@.gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1162496955.745756.103220@.e3g2000cwe.go oglegroups.com...
>
>
>
|||I still have this issue.. Any thoughts? ... ideas.. ?
Thanks in advance..
Query Builder wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I am connected thru EM using the SA account. I also have adimin rights
> thru windows authentication...
> How do I check my subscriptions are expired or not? I created a new
> replication for testing and it is also working fine but i dont see the
> replication in the replication monitor.. I do see the publications
> under the replication--> publication tree...
> THanks for all your input. I would apprecate if you can help me figure
> this out...! Thanks again
>
> On Nov 3, 6:34 am, "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cot...@.gmail.com> wrote:
|||I still have this issue.. Any thoughts? ... ideas.. ?
Thanks in advance..
Query Builder wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I am connected thru EM using the SA account. I also have adimin rights
> thru windows authentication...
> How do I check my subscriptions are expired or not? I created a new
> replication for testing and it is also working fine but i dont see the
> replication in the replication monitor.. I do see the publications
> under the replication--> publication tree...
> THanks for all your input. I would apprecate if you can help me figure
> this out...! Thanks again
>
> On Nov 3, 6:34 am, "Hilary Cotter" <hilary.cot...@.gmail.com> wrote:
|||I finally figured out the issue... I had the sql names changed.. when I
changed it back, the replications appeared under the replication
monitor tab...
So the moral of the whole story(issue) is never change SQL jobs
associated with replication.. It will disspear from the replication
monitor group...
Query Builder wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I still have this issue.. Any thoughts? ... ideas.. ?
> Thanks in advance..
> Query Builder wrote:

Replication mechanism

Hello,
My situation is as follows:
I use Replication in my Mobile Application and when the PocketPc is
connected via USB the replication works fine. But when I tried to synchonize
the data via WLAN it does not work. My quoted url in my code looks as follows:
oRpl.InternetUrl = "http://IP-Adress/HelpDesk/sscesa20.dll"; //I also tried
it to replace the IP-Address with the machineName of my Desktop but it does
also not work.
I also tried to type in this address in my PocketPc when the WLAN is
activated but it occurs always an error that this page could not be loaded.
Does anybody know what else could be go wrong?
thx
patrick
what is the error message you are getting?
Also what happens when you use IE to connect to this url from your PocketPC?
You should get a message saying SQL Server CE agent or something like that.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
Now available for purchase at:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"pat" <pat@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:09678E54-FBB5-44EA-9327-6ED5FCBD28D7@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> My situation is as follows:
> I use Replication in my Mobile Application and when the PocketPc is
> connected via USB the replication works fine. But when I tried to
> synchonize
> the data via WLAN it does not work. My quoted url in my code looks as
> follows:
> oRpl.InternetUrl = "http://IP-Adress/HelpDesk/sscesa20.dll"; //I also
> tried
> it to replace the IP-Address with the machineName of my Desktop but it
> does
> also not work.
> I also tried to type in this address in my PocketPc when the WLAN is
> activated but it occurs always an error that this page could not be
> loaded.
> Does anybody know what else could be go wrong?
> thx
> patrick
|||That's the strange thing no error message occurs. When it is possible to
call this url "http://IP-Adress/HelpDesk/sscesa20.dll"; with my PocketPc and
the SQL Server CE Agent message appears, does then the replication must work?
patrick
|||Not necessarily, all it means is that your Pocket PC can connect to the web
server and the virtual directory. I think it also means that your web server
security is set up correctly. Now check the underlying security of your
snapshot folder. Does this reflect read access for the anonymous account
(IUSER_MachineName, or whatever account you are authenticating with)?
Then you should run profiler to determine how far into the replication
process your pull is going. This will help to trouble shoot further.
What would be really helpful is if you could post the error message your
program is raising.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"pat" <pat@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:732A1E5F-E844-4D0C-B119-B75692989AF7@.microsoft.com...
>
> That's the strange thing no error message occurs. When it is possible
> to
> call this url "http://IP-Adress/HelpDesk/sscesa20.dll"; with my PocketPc
> and
> the SQL Server CE Agent message appears, does then the replication must
> work?
> patrick

Replication Issue With Cisco VPN Client

Morning Guys,
I really need you help, I am just about to seriously pull my hair out. Here
is the situation.
I have 1 server running SQL Server 2000 sp3a with merge replication setup,
and 150 users on laptops running MSDE 2000 with the latest service pack and
dialling up to the server via a 56k modem and using a Cisco VPN Client to
gain access.
If I communicate on the network, all the replication works fine, if I
communicate on a ADSL Line all the communicates is fine, if I dialup,
communication will just fail, it will process the articles and then fail. I
really need some help here. I have adjusted the MTU rate on the server,
Cisco router and the client. but I just can't get this to work correctly and
I have this working in many other companies.
The dial up users are getting a good connection with 50k
If you need anymore information give me a shout.
Thanks Tim.
Tim,
have you tried following the recommendations in this article:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...49&Product=sql
It refers to a transactional setup but if you substitute 'merge agent' for
'distribution agent' it should apply eqally.
HTH,
Paul Ibison