Replication upgrade strategy: 2000 sp3 to 2005

  • Hello all,

    I've inherited a set of SQL Servers running sp3 (ick!). Publisher and Distributor on one server, pull subscribers on 5 others. One of subscriber databases is set for upgrade to 2005. I have urged caution here, as I have no experience with replication. Merge replication is being used.

    Am I reading correctly that 2005 cannot be a subsriber to a 2000 publisher?

    I am recommending that they install a 2000 instance to be used as a subscriber until we get a plan together to upgrade. But I am having an issue with order of operations here. Any lessons learned or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

    Should I upgrade all servers in the topology to sp4 first?

    How do I avoid any issues with replication here?

    Perhaps turn off replication... upgrade all servers to sp4 and then turn on replication with fingers crossed?

    My plan is to do a side by side upgrade to 2005, where I will install a 2005 instance on each of the existing machines, move the databaes, and re-initialize replication. As long as we have an appropriate window to move all of the databases, I don't anticipate any issues. Roll back strategy would be to fall back to existing 2000 servers.

    Any comments?

    Thank you,

    Todd Carrier

    Todd Carrier
    MCITP - Database Administrator (SQL 2008)
    MCSE: Data Platform (SQL 2012)

  • I can say that I have merge replication setup between 2005 and 2000. This was done at home for personal reasons, not in a "must work" production environment. I did set up the replication where the 2005 server acts as the "main" publisher and the distributor.

  • Todd,

    You can subscribe 2005 to 2000 ONLY if 2005 is a PULL subscription. The rule always is that the distribution agent should be the Highest Version in the topology if you use different versions.

    That is why the upgrade path is always distributor->publisher->subscriber.

    Cheers,


    * Noel

  • "...Am I reading correctly that 2005 cannot be a subsriber to a 2000 publisher?..."

    We have a 2005 subscriber to both Snapshot & Transactional subscriptions from a 2000 server .. No problems at all

    "...I am recommending that they install a 2000 instance to be used as a subscriber until we get a plan together to upgrade. But I am having an issue with order of operations here. Any lessons learned or suggestions would be greatly appreciated...."

    Sounds unnecessary to me

    "...Should I upgrade all servers in the topology to sp4 first? ..."

    Couldn't hurt

    "...How do I avoid any issues with replication here?

    Perhaps turn off replication... upgrade all servers to sp4 and then turn on replication with fingers crossed?..."

    Just upgrade during no activity. temporarily disable the subscription. No big deal

    "...My plan is to do a side by side upgrade to 2005, where I will install a 2005 instance on each of the existing machines, move the databaes, and re-initialize replication. As long as we have an appropriate window to move all of the databases, I don't anticipate any issues. Roll back strategy would be to fall back to existing 2000 servers...."

    I just did an "In_Place" upgrade of my test server with replication, and will be doing the same on our Production box in 2 weeks. I would suggest testing In_Place, because it's MUCH simpler than side-by-side. Not a single problem with the In_Place upgrade. Worked like a charm for us.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

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