Replication

Question

Replication

Viewing 11 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

webrunner SSC-Dedicated Points: 31862 More actions · Answer 1

Vinay Thakur-585143 (12/29/2009)
I apologize for my english. I was in hurry while posting the QOD, the only thing I would like to share was my experience on replication that when we uninstall the named instance on the server (irrespective of that instance in involved into replication or not) replication on that server will fail.
It should be like this"
We have server ABC and installed two instance on it ABC\First and ABC\Second. we setup the Transactional replication from ABC (Default) to ABC\First. after 1 week we UNinstalled instance ABC\Second(control panel\add remove program\... UNINstall ABC\Second).
even ABC\Second is not involved in replication the replication between default instance and ABC\First will failed) --- Also this I tested on Sql server 2000"
This is very interesting stuff I observed and would like to share.... but everybody was laughing on my english.... 🙂
I blog for the same :
http://vinay-thakur.spaces.live.com/default.aspx?_c01_BlogPart=blogentry&_c=BlogPart&handle=cns!645E3FC14D5130F2!229
I learned a lot on QOD so want to contribute my one cent.
I agree that my english is not so good.

Hello, Vinay,

Thank you for the clarification. I'm sorry you had to have people mocking your English. The question should have been phrased better, but regardless of any trouble anyone had in reading the question, that was no excuse for comments that insult or mock you. Several other members have written expressing the same sentiment, so I hope you won't be discouraged from posting future questions due to a few mocking comments.

My original comment (that I couldn't even hazard a guess for the answer from the question) was not intended as mockery of you (in fact I was mocking myself), but now that I have seen the other comments and read your comment in particular, I apologize personally if I unintentionally insulted you.

Sincerely,

webrunner

-------------------
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and asks, "Can I join you?"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html

Somanna Mr or Mrs. 500 Points: 506 More actions · Answer 2

Need to do ENGLISH Honors before I can understand the question properly. Anyway I understood my way and the answer was WRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG ...!!! Its my height of stupidity for attempting at this question

Thanks for reading

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736173 More actions · Answer 3

The grammar has been corrected. Apologies for any issues.

I will also award back points for this question.

Andrew Watson-478275 SSCarpal Tunnel Points: 4652 More actions · Answer 4

I have to admit that even now I understand the full question, I would still have got it wrong :crying:. As Vinay says, this is very surprising behaviour.

OCTom SSChampion Points: 11785 More actions · Answer 5

OK. Now that the fireworks has subsided... Shame on anyone who makes fun of someone's English proficiency. How many of you would be proficient in their language on a like forum?

I'm putting away my shaking finger now.

Is this a bug in SQL Server? Why would an instance that is not part of replication cause this behavior when removed?

vk-kirov SSCertifiable Points: 7686 More actions · Answer 6

skjoldtc (12/30/2009)
Is this a bug in SQL Server? Why would an instance that is not part of replication cause this behavior when removed?

The referenced article applies to SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition (see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/811008#appliesto). It looks like a bug in that edition. I hope there's no such bug in 2005 and 2008 🙂

DavidSimpson Hall of Fame Points: 3562 More actions · Answer 7

I did not answer the question because I did not fully understand it. After reading the explanation on what was meant I would have missed it any way. I never would have thought having three instances of SQL Server with Instance 1(default) & 2 set up for replication then the process of uninstalling instance 3 would cause replication between 1 & 2 to fail. Interesting. Thank you for sharing your experience.

David

free_mascot One Orange Chip Points: 27169 More actions · Answer 8

I also go wrong...

I also think that there are only two instances. But actually it’s Total 3 instance including default.

If we think logically nothing should be affected. But I still doubts if it's bug or not and thinking how it's affect to the other instance???

---------------------------------------------------
"Thare are only 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand binary, and those who don't."

jkoon-760461 Ten Centuries Points: 1109 More actions · Answer 9

I agree that some proofreading/editing seems to be needed on submissions - even with some of the featured articles I've had to strain to reconstruct sentences into proper English syntax as I read them. This question was very difficult to understand and most certainly misworded - unless the word is uninstall, the question makes no sense at all.

Rome1981 SSC-Addicted Points: 445 More actions · Answer 10

Rome1981

SSC-Addicted

Points: 445

January 5, 2010 at 7:23 am

#1098941

I want a refund on my point.

TomThomson SSC Guru Points: 104773 More actions · Answer 11

Steve Jones - Editor (12/29/2009)
The grammar has been corrected. Apologies for any issues.

It would have been useful also to alter the question to make it clear it was talking about SQL 2000, and not about SQL 2008. (Actually, I don't know for sure whether that particular bug has been fixed or not, but I imagine MS will have fixed it as they haven't updated the list of products to which the bug applies to include SQL 2005 or SQL 2008).

Tom