Home / server / Questions / 78732
Accepted
Ice
Asked: 2009-10-28 08:04:13 +0800 CST

Is Peer-to-Peer replication a replacement for a merge-replication?

  • 772

please help me in evaluating new possibilities with MS SQL Server 2008. For the last 3 years I have had an MS SQL 2000 Server Merge Replication with a Publisher and two Subscribers on duty, the backup of the database on one instance is as big as 19 GB. On each location data is inserted, updated and deleted. Everything works like a charm through a WAN with something like 10 mbit/s.

Now we change the platforms to win2008 and sql2008 and so arise new questions. The first: Is Peer-to-Peer replication a replacement for a merge-replication?

peace Ice

Update: In front of the answers, let me be more precise: We have on the publisher some tables which are not member of the replication. We also have more than one merge-replication on this database, a second separate one on some tables which were added later. (How many replicatons make sense; for each table her own replication?) There are no selections on a table so when a table is replicated all rows are delivered. Each table has an identity column. An additional Question: Are columns with type timestamp allowed with replication?

windows

2 Answers

  1. Best Answer

    It can be, but be aware of some big differences between the approaches:

    • Merge replication involves one publisher and multiple subscribers. In peer-to-peer, all nodes are both publishers and subscribers.
    • In merge replication, the subscribers can have different partitions of the data. In peer-to-peer, all nodes are identical.
    • Merge replication has conflict resolution. Peer-to-peer does not.
    • Peer-to-peer is only available in Enterprise Edition.

    Books Online has more details on both approaches.

    • 2

  2. Yes Peer to Peer can be a replacement for merge replication.

    • 1