thats the problem in not using a witness.

Force service (with possible data loss) on the mirror server.

Forcing service is possible only if the principal server is down, the session is...

no - nothing for mirroring that i know of - but doubletake might have some compression.... not sure as have never used it - it's a file level sync tool...

ok - look at some other software then to help you.

try

imceda(now quest i think) litespeed to compress your t-log backups in log shipping

or maybe doubletake

maybe these will cope...

glad to be of service - done it myself before and couldn't figure out why users with usernames longer than 25 chars were failing to run certain procs!!!!

same problems with log shipping as with mirroring - they're effectively the same, so your re-index will do the same thing to your wan.

again - if you mirror over the...

do you have a trigger that writes the contents of this field to another location???

or perhaps a cascading update from a foreign key - they might be trying to write...

just remember that if you mirror you primary to your off site server then on any failure of yor primary then the off site will pick up the load rather...

how are you attempting to change it ? using enterprise manager or are you scripting the change?

create procedure myproc

as

SELECT DISTINCT O.ODID,R.RCID,R.RQTY,R.RDATE,NetQty FROM RECEIVE R ,ORDER12 O WHERE O.PARTID = (SELECT PARTID FROM PART WHERE [DESC]= '+y+') AND O.ODID = R.ODID AND R.NetQty >0

GO

(i'm...

you'll be able to see if connection pooling is taking place by looking in a profiler trace against that database for a lot of sp_resetconnection commands

are you using connection pooling ? that would most likely be the problem.

what jdbc drivers are you using ?

after you cut down the data did you update statistics ?

might be that the query optimiser isn't picking the best plan for you due to out of date stats

i'd also...

there is a dubious piece of information somewhere on microsoft's site stating that for "optimal" performance a database should have as many files as there are CPU in the machine...

I normally go for the approach of moving all of my indexes into a seperate filegroup first. (if this is on a different array defrags are faster)

then move text objects...

I think the biggest thing you can do to get this runing well is to make sure you put the best disk config in possible. SQL standard will only support...