Search Results

Search found 1054 results on 43 pages for 'replication'.

Page 11/43 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • master to slave replication in mysql

    - by vijay
    i need master to slave replication in mysql so i am creating this procedure to change the master dynamically by procedure delimiter // CREATE PROCEDURE change_master( in host_ip varchar(50)) begin stop slave; CHANGE MASTER TO MASTER_HOST = host_ip, MASTER_PORT=3306, MASTER_USER='replication', MASTER_PASSWORD='slave'; start slave; end; // but i am getting a error. ERROR 1064 (42000): You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'host_ip, MASTER_PORT=3306, MASTER_USER='replication', MASTER_PASSWORD='slave'; s' at line 4 if i left it blank then fine eg. CHANGE MASTER TO MASTER_HOST = '', MASTER_PORT=3306, MASTER_USER='replication', MASTER_PASSWORD='slave'; i tried many time but in this query i am not able to use any variable why? if u know help me. thanks .

    Read the article

  • How can I centralise MySQL data between 3 or more geographically separate servers?

    - by Andy Castles
    To explain the background to the question: We have a home-grown PHP application (for running online language-learning courses) running on a Linux server and using MySQL on localhost for saving user data (e.g. results of tests taken, marks of submitted work, time spent on different pages in the courses, etc). As we have students from different geographic locations we currently have 3 virtual servers hosted close to those locations (Spain, UK and Hong Kong) and users are added to the server closest to them (they access via different URLs, e.g. europe.domain.com, uk.domain.com and asia.domain.com). This works but is an administrative nightmare as we have to remember which server a particular user is on, and users can only connect to one server. We would like to somehow centralise the information so that all users are visible on any of the servers and users could connect to any of the 3 servers. The question is, what method should we use to implement this. It must be an issue that that lots of people have encountered but I haven't found anything conclusive after a fair bit of Googling around. The closest I have seen to solutions are: something like master-master replication, but I have read so many posts suggesting that this is not a good idea as things like auto_increment fields can break. circular replication, this sounded perfect but to quote from O'Reilly's High Performance MySQL, "In general, rings are brittle and best avoided" We're not against rewriting code in the application to make it work with whatever solution is required but I am not sure if replication is the correct thing to use. Thanks, Andy P.S. I should add that we experimented with writes to a central database and then using reads from a local database but the response time between the different servers for writing was pretty bad and it's also important that written data is available immediately for reading so if replication is too slow this could cause out-of-date data to be returned. Edit: I have been thinking about writing my own rudimentary replication script which would involve something like having each user given a server ID to say which is his "home server", e.g. users in asia would be marked as having the Hong Kong server as their own server. Then the replication scripts (which would be a PHP script set to run as a cron job reasonably frequently, e.g. every 15 minutes or so) would run independently on each of the servers in the system. They would go through the database and distribute any information about users with the "home server" set to the server that the script is running on to all of the other databases in the system. They would also need to suck new information which has been added to any of the other databases on the system where the "home server" flag is the server where the script is running. I would need to work out the details and build in the logic to deal with conflicts but I think it would be possible, however I wanted to make sure that there is not a correct solution for this already out there as it seems like it must be a problem that many people have already come across.

    Read the article

  • What the best way to achieve RPO of zero and lowest possible RTO (less than 15 minutes) with SQL 2008 R2?

    - by Adrian Hope-Bailie
    We are running a payments (EFT transaction processing) application which is processing high volumes of transactions 24/7 and are currently investigating a better way of doing DB replication to our disaster recovery site. Our current and previous strategies have included using both DoubleTake and Redgate to replicate data to a warm stand-by. DoubleTake is the supported solution from the payments software vendor however their (DoubleTake's) support in South Africa is very poor. We had a few issues and simply couldn't ever resolve them so we had to give up on DoubleTake. We have been using Redgate to manually read the data from the primary site (via queries) and write to the DR site but this is: A bad solution Getting the software vendor hot and bothered whenever we have support issues as it has a tendency to interfere with the payment application which is very DB intensive. We recently upgraded the whole system to run on SQL 2008 R2 Enterprise which means we should probably be looking at using some of the built-in replication features. The server has 2 fairly large databases with a mixture of tables containing highly volatile transactional data and pretty static configuration data. Replication would be done over a WAN link to a separate physical site and needs to achieve the following objectives. RPO: Zero loss - This is transactional data with financial impact so we can't lose anything. RTO: Tending to zero - The business depends on our ability to process transactions every minute we are down we are losing money I have looked at a few of the other questions/answers but none meet our case exactly: SQL Server 2008 failover strategy - Log shipping or replication? How to achieve the following RTO & RPO with logshipping only using SQL Server? What is the best of two approaches to achieve DB Replication? My current thinking is that we should use mirroring but I am concerned that for RPO:0 we will need to do delayed commits and this could impact the performance of the primary DB which is not an option. Our current DR process is to: Stop incoming traffic to the primary site and allow all in-flight transaction to complete. Allow the replication to DR to complete. Change network routing to route to DR site. Start all applications and services on the secondary site (Ideally we can change this to a warmer stand-by whereby the applications are already running but not processing any transactions). In other words the DR database needs to, as quickly as possible, catch up with primary and be ready for processing as the new primary. We would then need to be able to reverse this when we are ready to switch back. Is there a better option than mirroring (should we be doing log-shipping too) and can anyone suggest other considerations that we should keep in mind?

    Read the article

  • Forcing DFS replication on Windows 2003 Web Edition SP2

    - by Greg B
    I have a pair of web servers running Windows Server 2003 Web Edition SP2 (build 3790). There servers are a on a Gigabit LAN and are on the same subnet. I created a new link on the 1st server and added the second box as a target to the link. I configured replication as ring. The 2nd server gets some of the files on the scheduled replication but this varies wildly which makes me think it's not running fully. The folder on server 1 is 1.3GB. Is there some way I can force repication (from a console?) and monitor the progress and see if/when/why it fails.

    Read the article

  • Sql server 2000 replication error

    - by Renato
    Good morning, I have a sql server 2000 machine, with SP4. I have a transactional replication. A keep receving this error message: The process could not execute 'sp_replcmds' on 'servername' the logreader stops responding.When i click start it starts fine, and the replication starts fine.And then, works for hours, and the problem comes back. In the begining i though it could be timeouts, but i already set a couple of parameters in the logreader profile,like querytimeout/readbatchsize. Sometimes when the logreader stops,it generates a dump, but not always. In event viewer, it appears this message: 17066 : SQL Server Assertion: File: , line=1985 Failed Assertion = 'startLSN = m_curLSN'. 18052 : Error: 3624, Severity: 20, State: 1. 17066 : SQL Server Assertion: File: , line=2223 Failed Assertion = 'm_noOfScAlloc == 0'. I also executed checkdb in the databases, and they are fine. have you every experienced something similar? thanks in advance, Renato Alves.

    Read the article

  • Linux stretch cluster: MD replication, DRBD or Veritas?

    - by PieterB
    For the moment there's a lot of choices for setting up a Linux cluster. For cluster manager: you can use Red Hat Cluster manager, Pacemaker or Veritas Cluster Server. The first one has the most momentum, the second one comes by default with RH subscriptions and the last one is very expensive and has a very good reputation ;-) For storage: - You can replicate LUN's using software raid / md device - You can use the network using DRBD replication, which offers a bit more flexibility - You can use Veritas Storage Foundation technology to talk to your SANs replication technology. Anyone has any recommandations or experience with these technologies?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Replication Agent priority

    - by Wikser
    Every hour a server replicates SQL server data with some external web server. During this time, which takes about 2-5minutes, the database seriously slows down. Colleagues, which work with the front end applications of that on another terminal server, even regularly start complaining. The databases are also synchroniously mirrored (via SQLServer mirroring, no replication) to a third server. Note that 99% of the data is replicated outgoing, so the server should rarely need to update its data. As the (merge and transactional) replication tasks are not time-critical, I would like to reduce their priority or somehow slow them down, so they don't affect the database performance that much. How would you implement that?

    Read the article

  • Linux stretch cluster: MD replication, DRBD or Veritas?

    - by PieterB
    For the moment there's a lot of choices for setting up a Linux cluster. For cluster manager: you can use Red Hat Cluster manager, Pacemaker or Veritas Cluster Server. The first one has the most momentum, the second one comes by default with RH subscriptions and the last one is very expensive and has a very good reputation ;-) For storage: - You can replicate LUN's using software raid / md device - You can use the network using DRBD replication, which offers a bit more flexibility - You can use Veritas Storage Foundation technology to talk to your SANs replication technology. Anyone has any recommandations or experience with these technologies?

    Read the article

  • RODC password replication and A/D sites and subnets

    - by Gregory Thomson
    I work at a school district with about 30 school sites. Windows 2008 A/D setup - all central at the district office. In A/D, all is under one site, and no subnets defined. One A/D forest and only one domain under that. We're now looking to start putting RODCs at the schools to put the authentication and DNS out there closer to them. I haven't worked with A/D sites and subnets, and only a little with RODC password replication. But just got an invite to a meeting to talk about this tomorrow... If we start breaking down the A/D pieces into sites/subnets, can we also use that as a way to help apply an RODC password replication policy in a way that matches so that only each school sites' users passwords are replicated/cached on their RODC?

    Read the article

  • Exchange 07 to 07 mailbox migration using local continuous replication

    - by tacos_tacos_tacos
    I have an existing Exchange Server ex0 and a fresh Exchange Server ex1, both 2007SP3. The servers are in different sites so users cannot access mailboxes on ex1 as from my understanding, a standalone CAS is required for this. I am thinking of doing the following: Enable local continous replication of the storage group on ex0 to a mapped drive that points to the corresponding storage group folder on ex1 At some point when the replication is done (small number of users and volume of mail), say on a late night on the weekend, disable CAS on ex0 (or otherwise redirect requests on the server-side from ex0 to ex1) AND change the public DNS name of the CAS so that it points to ex1. Will my plan work? If not, please explain what I can do to fix it.

    Read the article

  • Any experience on open source database synchronization open source solutions? [on hold]

    - by Boris Pavlovic
    I'm considering few database synchronization open source solutions. The system in need for data synchronization is composed of instances of different types of databases, i.e. heterogeneous system. There are few candidates: Symmetric DS Talend's Data Integration with support for data synchronization Continuent's Tungsteen Replication Daffodil Replicator OS Do you have any real world experience with any of these tools?

    Read the article

  • OpenLDAP mirror mode replication failing with TLS behind a load balancer

    - by Lynn Owens
    I have two OpenLDAP servers that are both running TLS. They are: ldap1.mydomain.com ldap2.mydomain.com I also have a load balancer cluster with a dns name of it's own: ldap.mydomain.com The SSL certificate has a CN of ldap.mydomain.com, with SANs of ldap1.mydomain.com and ldap2.mydomain.com. Everything works... Except mirror mode replication. My mirror mode replication is setup like this: ldap.conf TLS_REQCERT allow cn=config.ldif olcServerID: 1 ldap://ldap1.mydomain.com olcServerID: 2 ldap://ldap2.mydomain.com On ldap1, olcDatabase{1}hdb.ldif olcMirrorMode: TRUE olcSyncrepl: {0}rid=001 provider=ldap://ldap2.mydomain.com bindmethod=simple bindmethod=simple binddn="cn=me,dc=mydomain,dc=com" credentials="REDACTED" starttls=yes searchbase="dc=mydomain,dc=com" schemachecking=on type=refreshAndPersist retry="60 +" On ldap2, olcDatabase{1}hdb.ldif olcMirrorMode: TRUE olcSyncrepl: {0}rid=001 provider=ldap://ldap1.mydomain.com bindmethod=simple bindmethod=simple binddn="cn=me,dc=mydomain,dc=com" credentials="REDACTED" starttls=yes searchbase="dc=mydomain,dc=com" schemachecking=on type=refreshAndPersist retry="60 +" Here's the errors I'm getting in syslog: Dec 1 21:05:01 ldap1 slapd[6800]: slap_client_connect: URI=ldap://ldap2.mydomain.com DN="cn=me,dc=mydomain,dc=com" ldap_sasl_bind_s failed (-1) Dec 1 21:05:01 ldap1 slapd[6800]: do_syncrepl: rid=001 rc -1 retrying Dec 1 21:05:08 ldap1 slapd[6800]: conn=1111 fd=20 ACCEPT from IP=ldap.mydomain.com:2295 (IP=ldap1.mydomain.com:636) Dec 1 21:05:08 ldap1 slapd[6800]: conn=1111 fd=20 closed (TLS negotiation failure) Any ideas? I've been working on OpenLdap for way too long now.

    Read the article

  • Feasibility of Windows Server 2008 DFS replication over WAN link

    - by CesarGon
    We have just set up a WAN link that connects two buildings in our organisation. The link is provided by a 100-Mbps point to point line. We have a Windows Server 2008 R2 domain controller on each side of the link. Now we are planning to set up DFS for file services across the organisation. The estimated data volume is over 2 TB, and will grow at approximately 20% annually. My idea is to set up a file server in each building and install DFS so that all the contents stay replicated over the 100-Mbps link. I hope that this will ensure that any user will be directed to the closest (and fastest) server when requesting a file from the DFS folders. My concern is whether a 100-Mbps WAN link is good enough to guarantee DFS replication. I've no experience with DFS, so any solid advice is welcome. The line is reliable (i.e. it doesn't crash often) and our data transfer tests show that a 5 MB/sec transfer rate is easily achieved. This is approximately 40% of the nominal bandwidth. I am also concerned about the latency. I mean, how long will users need to wait to see one change on one side of the link after the change has been made on the other side. My questions are: Is this link between networks a reliable infrastructure on which to set up DFS replication? What latency times would be typical (seconds, minutes, hours, days)? Would you recommend that we go for DFS in this scenario, or is there a better alternative? Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • In SQL Server merge replication, how does reinitializing work?

    - by Craig Shearer
    I have set up a pull subscription to a merge publication in SQL Server. I use parameterized row filters on some tables. This works fine with the initial synchronization - just the rows using the filter arrive in the replicated (client) database. However, at some later point I'd like to be able to synchronize the replicated database again from the server and have new rows that match the parameterized row filters appear on the client database. The doucmentation seems to indicate that I can call Reinitialize() to do this. However, when I do try this and Synchronize again, I get an error saying that the script 'snapshot.pre' cannot be applied to the database. I've inspected the script and can see why - it's trying to drop some functions are used by the tables in the database. It would appear that for Reinitialize() to work it requires that the database be blank. Am I misunderstanding something here? Is there a way to make this work?

    Read the article

  • mysql master-master setup as a way to simply master-slave promotion

    - by Chris Go
    I'm trying to see if the following plan is viable. Goal here is to be able to do HA (uptime) and not necessarily for load -- writes are fine on one MySQL 5.5 server (with innodb) but not really possible when the database is down. Currently, I have a master-slave replication setup which works fine except it doesn't have automatic promotion (obviously). what I am planning on doing is setup master-master replication to possibly do this "automatic promotion" using Amazon Route 53 DNS Failover (Health checks). What I am trying to avoid is to NOT have to do the auto-increment trick because the "business folks" got used to the auto-incrementing PK as consecutive numbers (yeah, I know this is bad but data is from 2004). So, setup the master-master replication WITHOUT the auto-increment collision prevention bit. The primary master is db1.domain.com and secondary master is db2.domain.com In Amazon Route 53, setup DNS Failover record for db.domain.com - primary failover is db1.domain.com - with a TCP healthcheck on IP address port 3306 - secondary failover is db2.domain.com - with a TCP healthcheck on IP address port 3306 Most of the time (99%), unless tcp://db1.domain.com:3306 is dead, db1.domain.com will be served up on DNS hits to db.domain.com. In fact, hopefully this is 100%. The possible downsides of this is the loss of a primary key (collision) and I think I am OK with losing one order. We are a low data volume B2B business and can just call our client up if this occurs (like an order disappearing). Does this sound like a good plan? Then I will also run another slave replication on db1.domain.com as "master" to a slave-db1.domain.com -- not sure why, maybe for heavy SELECTs?

    Read the article

  • How to properly shrink a disk size of a server that is being backed up off-site?

    - by JKM
    We have a Virtual machine (lets call this one source) that is being hosted locally with a 1TB disk space (that's how big the virtual disk is) and it has been replicated remotely via Veeam to an off-site server (lets call this clone). However, there has been some server configuration changes that has made source not require as much disk space. I am contemplating shrinking the disk size of source, or using the standalone converter to create a new image with a much smaller disk size requirement (about 300GB). The reason behind this is to lessen the time required for the "Discovering replica VM" step during the replication process. My question is what happens to clone when the replication job is run? Do I need to redo the replication/set up a new backup to create an initial seed for source? Will the job automatically pick up that the disk size has shank and adjust the disk size of clone appropriately? What is the best method for accomplishing this?

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2010 to Exchange 2010 Public Folder Replication

    - by Archit Baweja
    We have 2 exchange servers in our org. MX1 and MX2. I'm trying to replicate all MX1 public folders to MX2. I've setup replication for all the toplevel folders to include the MX2 server. However no public folders are being replicated. The event log does not show any errors. I've set the diagnostic level for all public folder diagnostics to Highest using get-eventloglevel "MSExchangeIS\9001 Public\*" | set-eventloglevel -Level Expert However besides a 3092 event ID (type: 0x2) generated on MX1 (the source server), there are no events being generated that would notify me of any issues. Some technical details. MX1 is Windows 2008 Standard, MX2 is Windows 2008 Enterprise (eval mode right now).

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2007 to 2010 public folder replication error 1129

    - by Keith
    I currently upgrading from an Exchange server 2007 to 2010. I have moved all mailboxes and OAB. I am having issues replicating the public folders. This is the error I'm getting in the event log on the 2007 box: Error 1129 occurred while processing a replication event. Folder: (6-11ED8367F0C) IPM_SUBTREE\Marketing\Marketing I have looked online and everything about these errors seems to relate from an old 2003 server. Well, we never had a 2003 server. I'm really not sure what to do at this point. Any help?

    Read the article

  • failover cluster file replication

    - by user156144
    I have a Windows 2008 R2 failover cluster server. I am going to move one of our window services onto this new server. The service writes some trace information to a log file on the local harddrive. This will become a problem when it is moved to cluster server when cluster A become unavailable and cluster B takes over and now there are 2 places where I need to look for log files. Is there a way to make sure regardless of which cluster is on, I get one complete log file? I have been researching this and there is something called DFS replication but i was wondering if there is something better that works with failover cluster... I prefer not having to update my code. I can specify it to write log files to a different location by changing app.config file but no code change...

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2005 Replication Subscription Expiring Warning

    - by Aaron
    This week one of my replication subscriptions expired because I wasn't getting any alerts saying that there was a login error (I've fixed those alerts and the error). What I'd like now is, in the case that this happens again, to be able to send an alert saying that a subscription is about to expire (ie, it will expire in 1 or 2 days). I have an alert set up for when a subscription expires, but this is after the fact. I've looked through sys.messages for any text that has "Expir" in it, but I haven't found an appropriate error code yet. Would anyone be able to point me in the right direction? Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >