Migration Strategy -- parallel environment, log shipped db's -- Screenies included!

  • Good Day SSC!

    Looking to migrate our 2005 environment into 2012.

    Current servers:

    -- OLTP box

    -- WH1 warehouse box

    -- WH2 warehouse box

    A log shipping routine moves 3 databases from the OLTP server into read only versions on *each* of the WHx's. Jobs on each WH machine consume the OLTP data using 3 part naming. Things work. This setup is illustrated in the left side of the attached PNG.

    We proposed (and have started to develop) a solution in 2012 that would let us run in parallel with production, that introduces the idea of a "data well" server (right side of the PNG). Basically, instead of log shipping to each WH box, we just ship to 1 machine, and the WH's will draw their information from that machine using 4 part naming.

    What we're finding is that long running jobs are running even longer in the new setup (the right side of the graphic).

    Are we walking down the wrong path here? Before it's too late, how should we be doing this? I know 2012 introduces some fancy new logship/replication options, but I think our network might be the bottleneck right now.

    Requirements: Run in parallel, trivial switchover, GET TO 2012 ASAP.

    Thank you

  • Am not sure about your particular business requirements, but I can imagine this setup will be slower since you are introducing a new layer in your architecture, and also I imagine log-shipping is much faster than traditional SELECT statements.#

    If you are sure you want to go ahead with the extra "layer" in your architecture (which will always be slower than removing that layer), then you might be better off using the new AlwaysOn to maintain a read-only secondary of your OLTP server. Also, you might benefit from using SSIS or BULK INSERT technology to shift the data across to the WH boxes, rather than the traditional linked server SELECT statements, which could be slower.

    Hope this helps!

    />L

    -----------------
    ... Then again, I could be totally wrong! Check the answer.
    Check out posting guidelines here for faster more precise answers[/url].

    I believe in Codd
    ... and Thinknook is my Chamber of Understanding

  • Thank you ib.naji. Just looking for ideas at this point. Always on, will check that. Ad-hoc Linked Server queries just don't seem to be working.

    It's starting to sound like we're going to rethink this. We'll probably end up using Always On to push read-only versions of the needed databases to each of the WH's that need the data.

    Thanks!

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

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