dbTalk Databases Forums  

DISASTER RECOVERY

microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients


Discuss DISASTER RECOVERY in the microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients forum.



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM






Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM






Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM



Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM



Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM



Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM



Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM



Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM



Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM



Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old   
Ekrem Önsoy
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: DISASTER RECOVERY - 03-18-2008 , 02:15 PM



Are your SQL Server servers in the same room? Do you need a real-time copy
of your database? Do you need just a copy of your database or you want to
use the secondary database?

Main difference between them is that Database Mirroring is a warm\hot
standby and replication is a warm standby solution. Which means, Database
Mirroring has a mode which provides you Automatic Failover (just like in
Failover Cluster's but faster), but you must failover manually when you use
Replication. Besides, as Database Mirroring' s Automatic Failover mode is a
synchorous mode, it may slow your primary database if the link between the
Primary Server and the Secondary Server is not good enough.

The only way to query a mirror database in Database Mirroring is using
Database Snapshots (which is available in Developer, Evaluation and
Enterprise Editions only) However you can query your secondary database in
Replication.

It's easier to manage Database Mirroring than Replication.

--
Ekrem Önsoy



"Noor" <naissani (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
I would appreciate if any one let me know which one is the best for
disaster recovery and why.

Database Mirroring
Replication

I am using SQL Server 2005 and the application is mission critical. Please
advice

Thanks



Reply With Quote
Reply




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.