Replication Interview Questions 

Hello I've setup transactional replication on SQL SERVER 2000 (SP3). Its been working fine for about 6 months, however i've recently noticed the following error. The process could not execute 'sp_replcmds' on 'servername' . Could anyone shed any light on how to cure this problem.

My company uses a really bad POS system with about 150 clients. The POS software is garbage. Each of the cash registers has a SQL Server on it, and each connects to the central database server. The clients check for replication about once every 5 minutes. They are constantly replicating day and night, and on top of this each one has a service on it that pings the database server continuously. (When pinging stops the server assumes a problem.)

If all of this is done on a 100 Mb infrastructure, is all this activity going to saturate the line to the server? (These things are all continuously 24/7/365 replicating and pinging.)

I'm using SQL Server 2000 as the backend. Need database to store on individual laptops and connection over the web as well as in the office.

I need some help with SQL backups - the databases can grow by over 5Gb a day with all the transaction logs and this is making the backup huge and the time window massive ! Last nights backup was 96Gb and took just over 14 hours ! There has to be a better way of doing this ! Can I use incremental with SQL databases ? Is replication better than tape backup ??? Any help greatly appreciated !

Thanks

Garry

what does these other companies provide that MS SQL does not already?

I had to create an application once that had potential new records coming in for the same table from multiple distributed databases, that merged together with manual replication.

I started with Integer ID's, but quickly realized I had to use UniqueIdentifiers to avoid conflicting ID values.

So I got into the habit of ALWAYS using UID's in tables vs. integer ID's. And later I met an expert SQL programmer who said I was doing the right thing for larger systems, and that it was a good habit to develop.

But I still see a lot of other SQL database developers still using integer ID's, even by expert, long-time SQL developers.

So what's the "best practice"?

When is it preferable to use integer based ID's vs UID's?

The same Microsoft® SQL Server™ 2000 database engine operates on Microsoft Windows® 2000 Professional, Microsoft Windows 2000 Server, Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server, Windows 98, and Windows Millennium Edition. It also runs on all editions of Microsoft Windows NT® version 4.0. The database engine is a robust server that can manage terabyte-sized databases accessed by thousands of users. Additionally, when running at its default settings, SQL Server 2000 has features such as dynamic self-tuning that let it work effectively on laptops and desktops without burdening users with administrative tasks. SQL Server 2000 Windows CE Edition extends the SQL Server 2000 programming model to mobile Windows CE devices and is easily integrated into SQL Server 2000 environments.

SQL Server 2000 works with Windows NT and Windows 2000 failover clustering to support immediate failover to a backup server in continuous operation. SQL Server 2000 also introduces log shipping, which allows you to maintain a warm standby server in environments with lower availability requirements.

Same Server Across Windows 2000, Windows NT, Windows 98, and Windows Millennium Edition Platforms
The same programming model is shared in all environments, because the SQL Server 2000 database engine runs on Windows NT Workstation, Windows NT Server, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows 2000 Server, Windows 2000 Advanced Server, Windows 2000 Datacenter Server, Windows 98, and Windows Millennium Edition.

In general, an application written for an instance of SQL Server 2000 operating in one environment works on any other instance of SQL Server 2000. The Microsoft Search service is not available on the Windows NT Workstation, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows Millennium Edition, or Windows 98 operating systems. SQL Server databases on those platforms do not support full-text catalogs and indexes. Applications running on these operating systems can, however, make use of the full-text capabilities if they connect to an instance of SQL Server 2000 on a different computer that supports them.

The differences in the behavior of SQL Server 2000 when running on the different operating systems are due mainly to features not supported by Windows Millennium Edition or Windows 98. Generally, these features, such as asynchronous I/O and scatter/gather I/O, do not affect the data or responses given to applications. They just prevent instances of SQL Server running on Windows Millennium or Windows 98 from supporting the same levels of performance as are possible for instances of SQL Server on Windows NT or Windows 2000. Instances of SQL Server on Windows Millennium Edition or Windows 98, however, do not support failover clustering and cannot publish transactional replications.

ms sql server

If so could you give me a walk threw on it?

I need to take the tables from our test database and set up replication to make all changes on the test Database go live each night at midnight. Any Ideas?

is it possible to implement sql server 2000 replication on network between two systems using windows xp...if possible then please explain me the steps.... i have tried everything but the sql server on two systems just don't connect??
Any help will be appreciated!