Thank you both for the responses.
(12/30/2013)
Such as?Why did you feel that LS was not a viable route?
My concern has to do with contact backups on the primary database, transmissions failures, etc. From what I've seen, when transmitting a large number of logs because of potential connection issues and the number of backups we run, log-shipping may be a problem. Also, we do need the secondary DB to be readable. Which I know can be done with log-shipping but I thought it would be easier to use replication. This may not be the case.
(12/30/2013)
- IMHO, mirroring and log shipping are far easier to maintain than replication. Mirroring and log shipping ship the whole database whereas replication is done at an object level.As I have already said, "why did you feel that mirroring or log shipping were not suitable?
From what both of you have said, mirroring may be the way to go. I have never implemented mirroring between servers at different data locations. We do have a fast connection so even if there is a couple gigs of data to mirror, do you see this as being a problem? Also in terms of maintenance, is it easier to maintain log shipping or mirroring.
We don't need the DR server to be up and running the instant one of the primary DB's is down so I definitely don't want there to be automatic failover.