Arthur Fuller
artful at rogers.com
Tue May 13 08:06:01 CDT 2003
No you do not have to install RM on each machine. I have quite a bit of experience (and good stories) with RM, so allow me.... In my first experiments with replication, I needed to replicate a db among 4 branch offices connected over the net with a vpn. In this phase, each office had a server that was being hit by each local pc. The server at HQ had the synchronizer installed, and it replicated among the office servers every 15 minutes. It worked flawlessly. Then I got to thinking that this same scenario would work locally, and eliminate 90% of the net traffic that a classic FE/BE would normally incur. So I set up a synchronizer on each branch server, and a replica on each local pc. The branch server synchronized the local pcs with the server BE every 5 minutes, and the HQ server synchronized the branch server replicas. All replicas were set up as managed replicas, save one: the master replica, which resided on my development box, alongside my own managed replica. When I modified tables etc. and changed the FE to work against the master correctly, tested etc., I was then ready to publish the changes. I manually synched my master replica with my local replica. Five minutes later it synched with the branch replica, propagating the changes both locally and company-wide. It worked flawlessly for months, until eventually we migrated to SQL 2000. As a result of these experiments, I am now convinced that the classic FE/BE setup is obsolete. The setup outlined above, even for a single office with say 20 users, is dramatically faster than the classic layout. Arthur -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of John Skolits Sent: May 13, 2003 8:45 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: RE: [AccessD] Replication Manager or Briefcase Andrew, Thanks for getting back to me. I looked at Mike's site (haven't been there for a while- Gee I wish he had a search tool). I also posted on the MS newsgroup and Mike responded. Here was his comment: "Do not use the briefcase. It is less painful to hit your hand with a hammer than to put yourself through that kind of pain. MichKa [MS]" I like the way he is so direct. Anyway, I've been doing a lot of reading from newsgroup postings and I'm confused about one thing. I'm getting the impression that I do have to install the Rep Mngr app on each machine. I'm thinking that I will want to periodically do indirect Sync to my hub database but in order to do that, I will need the synchronizer on each PC. Here is a posting that talks about it. Is this person wrong or do I misunderstand something. Go to the following link and select the posting with the topic: "What is the best way to do this" http://support.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.aspx?NewsGroup=microsoft.pub lic.access.replication <http://support.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.aspx?NewsGroup=microsoft.pu blic.access.replication&SLCID=US&ICP=GSS3&sd=GN&id=fh;en-us;newsgroups> &SLCID=US&ICP=GSS3&sd=GN&id=fh;en-us;newsgroups John -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Haslett, Andrew Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 11:06 PM To: 'accessd at databaseadvisors.com' Subject: RE: [AccessD] Replication Manager or Briefcase Check out Michael Kaplans site: http://www.trigeminal.com He's the guru of Access Replication, and among other things, has made his own 'replication manager' much more powerful than the one from MS. The are a number of excellent articles on replication on his site also. Additionally, you shouldn't need to install a replication manager on each machine. Cheers, Andrew ----Original Message----- From: John Skolits [mailto:askolits at ot.com] Sent: Tuesday, 13 May 2003 1:34 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: [AccessD] Replication Manager or Briefcase I'm trying to decide which is the best method to handle replication. This will involve around 7 users. I have 2 office locations: 1 in Philadelphia and 1 in Cleveland. The are connected with an Asynchronous line. Therefore the data connection will be slow. They will eventually switch to a regular T1 line, but not for a few months. I have looked at the Replication Manager which looks like a good fit but I would have to install it on all the PC's and (I believe) have the synchronizer running on the server where everyone would replicate to. I would then do indirect synchronization. Someone said they used the Briefcase to do the synchronizations. With that method, I would not have to install Replication Manager on all the PC's. This is not mission critical information so the briefcase looks like a better solution with much less programming overhead. Anyone have any insights on this? John IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ ******************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may contain information protected by law from disclosure. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system. No warranty is given that this email or files, if attached to this email, are free from computer viruses or other defects. They are provided on the basis the user assumes all responsibility for loss, damage or consequence resulting directly or indirectly from their use, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://databaseadvisors.com/pipermail/accessd/attachments/20030513/bfa2fea1/attachment-0001.html>