Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase 123»»»

Log Shipping vs. Replication Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Wednesday, June 09, 2004 2:21 PM


SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 4:05 AM
Points: 291, Visits: 32
Comments posted to this topic are about the content posted at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/pibison


Paul Ibison
Paul.Ibison@replicationanswers.com
Post #120198
Posted Thursday, June 17, 2004 1:17 AM
SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, December 06, 2012 8:30 AM
Points: 879, Visits: 810

Good article, 1 remark/disagreement though:

It is stated that logschipping can be done every minute. Maybe this uis theoratically so, but most articles describing logshipping do not suggest an interval of a minute; 15 to 30 minutes is more likely, which means a greater dataloss in case of a disaster.

Even so, some servers have such a workload, having a log shipped every minute will increase this workload and in some cases a minute would not be enough to get the shipping done.




Greetz,
Hans Brouwer
Post #121513
Posted Thursday, June 17, 2004 10:00 AM


SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 4:05 AM
Points: 291, Visits: 32

Thanks Hans,

I agree that 1 minute is more of a theoretical than practical minimum for log shipping, but it is the MS recommendation in one specific case I know of. If you are doing transactional replication and are backing up the publisher and distributor, you can select a 'sync with backup' option which ensures data is sent to the distributor only once it has been backed up on the publisher. To ensure this backup is as frequent as possible, log-shipping at a frequency of once a minute is recommended. However I agree that this wouldn't be a preferred setup for a typical production server.

Regards,

Paul




Paul Ibison
Paul.Ibison@replicationanswers.com
Post #121660
Posted Thursday, June 17, 2004 10:04 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, January 16, 2012 12:55 PM
Points: 34, Visits: 688

Good Article!

Reduced 60+ pages to 1.   Yes log shipping at a 1 minute interval is tight and may not be practicle.

But it's a good summary and to get much detail beyond this you nearly need to implement the solutions and learn.

Best

David Branscome




Post #121664
Posted Thursday, June 17, 2004 2:40 PM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, November 10, 2005 4:42 PM
Points: 4, Visits: 1

Good article.  Thanks Paul.

I have one question regarding this.  Will either of these techniques work over the internet?  If so, what are the pros and cons for each in that scenario?

Thanks - Joe

Post #121715
Posted Friday, June 18, 2004 9:38 AM


SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 4:05 AM
Points: 291, Visits: 32

Joe,

neither method can use HTTP. Actually, replication can for CE devices but this is not especially useful for failover . I'm hoping 2005 will have this functionality.

For VPN access, once set up, the're are no major differences to the list in my article.

Some 'minor' differences:

In both cases the setup alters (if you're interested in this I can recommend this article: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321822.).

Depending on the bandwidth/quantity of information, timeouts may need to be reconfigured. The actual quantity of information can vary enormously between replication and log-shipping which may be a factor. EG imagine if you edited a row 1000 times. This is a 1000 transactions in the log. In merge replication this is simply one row - the last one.

HTH,

Paul Ibison

 




Paul Ibison
Paul.Ibison@replicationanswers.com
Post #121886
Posted Friday, August 11, 2006 7:21 AM
SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 2:52 AM
Points: 870, Visits: 884

Good article. 

One thing that should also be taken into account when considering replication is that comes with a greater management overhead than log shipping.

Log shipping is far easier to set up and once it's running it generally requires very little intervetion whereas replication needs a closer eye.  Problems are also easier to troubleshoot with log shipping.

In addition, with replication you need to worry about performance because replication will place more overhead on your publisher and you might need to consider using a seperate server for your distributor (depends on transaction throughput and various other factors).

With log shipping, you're going to be backing up your logs anyway so there's isn't a big performance hit - network will be a little more saturated but hopefully you're copying logs through a local network that won't affect the network on which clients come in.

These reasons, along with the reasons you already mentioned, mean that I would consider log shipping first for failover.



Karl
source control for SQL Server
Post #301182
Posted Friday, August 11, 2006 8:35 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 1:56 PM
Points: 209, Visits: 349

One of the considerations with regards to log shipping is the file size of the logs and the pipe with which you are going to be using.  Failover doesn't always mean locally to a server sitting in the same room due to a problem with the primary server.  DR requirements could be a failover due to bigger issues, ie Hurricanes if you happen to be doing buisness in the southeast.  DOH!

Keep that in mind when deciding on which way to go and how you are going to be implementing the log shipping solution.  I know there are products out there that can compress the log prior to shipping and uncompress on the receiving side (this is not a plug for those products, just pointing it out).

Just my 2cents.

Mark

Post #301224
Posted Friday, August 11, 2006 9:09 AM
Valued Member

Valued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued Member

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:22 AM
Points: 74, Visits: 27

I'm assuming that this comparison was done based on MS SQL 2000.  I'd like to know what your opinion is regarding SQL 2005 and any changes that you might make to these statements. 

Better yet, I'd like to see an additional column added that breaks down the same discussion points if you were to use DB mirroring + snapshots.  My understanding is that this would be the best approach for satisfying both High Availability AND reporting server needs.

What do you think?




Post #301242
Posted Friday, August 11, 2006 9:47 AM


SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 4:05 AM
Points: 291, Visits: 32

Correct - the article was written 2 years ago and has been reposted.

I'll work on an update which brings database mirroring / database snapshots into the equation, and also snapshot committed isolation level for the reporting capability of the transactional replication system.

Rgds,

Paul Ibison




Paul Ibison
Paul.Ibison@replicationanswers.com
Post #301263
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 123»»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse