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 |
|
betesh
Starting Member
34 Posts |
 Posted - 2008-07-21 : 02:22:51
|
| Hi All,I have set up transactional replication with updatable push subsriptions. The client and server each have been replicating each others updates. However, when I created a conflict (updated the same field in the same record with different values) the synchronization recognized that there was was "one transaction with 2 commands" to process on each end but didn't actually make any changes. Each side maintained their own updates. Meanwhile, I checked the subscription options on the publication properties and the conflict resolution policy is set to "Keep the publisher change" as we would like to happen. There are no records in the conflicts table for the subscription. Why haven't the conflicts been recognized? Isn't is possible to have conflict resolution in transactional bidirectional replication?In case it is useful to know the client and server are both running workgroup editions of SQL Server. They are connecting via VPN and both sides can see each other. |
|
|
betesh
Starting Member
34 Posts |
Posted - 2008-07-21 : 05:37:51
|
| I recreated the publication as merge replication and this time the conflicts resolved perfectly. I wonder if the conflict resolution works differently with transactional...Thanks for listening! |
 |
|
|
sodeep
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7174 Posts |
Posted - 2008-07-21 : 08:04:47
|
| conflict resolutions are handled correctly only in Merge replication.You can use Conflict viewer button. |
|
|
|
rmiao
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7266 Posts |
Posted - 2008-07-21 : 22:24:27
|
| >> Isn't it possible to have conflict resolution in transactional bidirectional replication?Yes it is. How did you set that? By the way, take look at peer to peer replication if you use sql2k5 enterprise edition. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conflicts don't register