Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
schwizzla
Starting Member
3 Posts |
 Posted - 2008-06-23 : 07:18:20
|
| We have Lots of databases wich typically have three Trasactional Publications and two subscribers. Some DB's use a shared distribution Agent for all three Pubs whilst some DB's use Independent Agents. The reason for this set up seems to be purely by chance.BOL says "Sharing the same Distribution Agent reduces the resource demands and increases performance at the Distributor". Whilst some resources on the net say "IF you use independant Agents, you can get performance improvements while replicating your data". This seems to be conflicting information.I know I should go with BOL but having seperate distribution streams does make more sense (although I now have three jobs per subsciber instead of one using this method). Also more importantly, if one publications fails with dodgy data then this does not affect the other Publications. What do other people think?Thanks in advance |
|
|
RickD
Slow But Sure Yak Herding Master
3608 Posts |
Posted - 2008-06-23 : 08:41:35
|
| I think your transfer rate depends on the tables rowsize and your network (including network cards). In 2000, I had to put some larger tables into their own distribution agents simply due to the time they would take to replicate.It really does depend on the situation for each publication. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Shared or Independant Distribution Agents?