Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
Akshal
Starting Member
2 Posts |
 Posted - 2010-04-23 : 16:31:18
|
| Hi All,I am designing an application with asp.net and sql server 2008.The application is a client server application. The server is hosted centrally is a data entry application. The users for the application are in offices in these locations : NY,London,Amsterdam, Chennai.In a normal use, user access the application over web and do data entry. But we need a backup availability plan in case a location is for some reason disconnected from the central site.. Network down etc.So, the business is requesting a remote DB and applciation in each location so that in case the network fails, the users can access the local app and DB and continue data entry.How can we maintain the local DBs.. How can we sync up and merge the data from each location to central server?After the network is up, we merge data,delete the local DB data and continue working with the central system. This will be done only in case of a large network down etc.Comments and thoughts please. |
|
|
tomy74
Starting Member
32 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-23 : 17:54:07
|
| Hi Akshal,As you mentioned above you need a local DB to be available in officies in these locations : NY,London,Amsterdam, Chennai in case the network fails and the web site is not accessible.SQL server merge replication with central publisher is the best solution for such design:-Replication topologies - Central publisherThis is one of the most used replication topologies. In this scenario, one server is configured as Publisher and Distributor and another server/servers is/are configured as Subscriber/Subscribers. -Replication types - Merge replicationMerge replication is the most difficult replication type. It makes possible autonomous changes to replicated data on the Publisher and on the Subscriber. With Merge replication, SQL Server captures all incremental data changes in the source and in the target databases, and reconciles conflicts according to rules you configure or using a custom resolver you create. Merge replication is best used when you want to support autonomous changes of the replicated data on the Publisher and on the Subscriber. for more details check this article:http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mssql/article.php/1438231/Setting-Up-Merge-Replication-A-Step-by-step-Guide.htm#part_3Regards,Tarek GhazaliSQL Server MVPhttp://www.sqlmvp.com |
 |
|
|
Akshal
Starting Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 2010-04-26 : 13:34:55
|
| Thanks Tarek for your comments.Yes merge replication is a good option.But in my application, all remote locations are potential publishers. Lets say NY lost its connectivity to the central server, then it will use its local DB for its data entry for the time the central server is down. Once the central server comes up, the NY DB's data needs to be sent to the central server, the users start using the central server again. So, the merge is selective and only occurs when the central server is down.Will merge replication work for these scenarios too? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SQL Server - Remote and Central