Comparison of different replication types

Greetings,
I'm looking for a document that does a really good comparison of merge
replication, peer-to-peer transactional replication, and transactional
replication with updating subscribers. Does anyone know of a site or
document with such a comparison? I would especially be interested in
scalability/performance information regarding the different types of
replication.
Thanks,
Sam Bendayan
DB Architect
Ultimate Software
sam.bendayan@.gmail.com
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
Also, I found in one of the blog posts a statement saying that
Peer-To-Peer replication does not scale well beyond 10 nodes. Just to
be perfectly clear, does this mean that if you have more than 10 servers
in the replication topology then you will start to see performance
problems and that there is no good solution to this?
It also states that merge replication is better for a large number of
nodes. Is it possible to have these larger number of nodes synchronized
frequently (every few minutes), or will that not scale well either?
Thanks,
SB
Sam Bendayan
DB Architect
Ultimate Software
sam.bendayan@.gmail.com
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
|||In a PASS talk on SQL Server 2005 Replication, Philip Vaughn the Microsoft
program manager for Replication said that (IIRC) between 10-15 nodes the
network links become saturated and he did not recommend scaling it beyond
this number.
Regarding scaling merge replication, you have to look at hierarchies.
Depending on the amount of data you sync with each subscriber each time you
might have to limit the number of concurrent merge processes.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Sam Bendayan" <sam.bendayan@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:u4DP5YFvHHA.3724@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Also, I found in one of the blog posts a statement saying that
> Peer-To-Peer replication does not scale well beyond 10 nodes. Just to
> be perfectly clear, does this mean that if you have more than 10 servers
> in the replication topology then you will start to see performance
> problems and that there is no good solution to this?
> It also states that merge replication is better for a large number of
> nodes. Is it possible to have these larger number of nodes synchronized
> frequently (every few minutes), or will that not scale well either?
> Thanks,
> SB
> Sam Bendayan
> DB Architect
> Ultimate Software
> sam.bendayan@.gmail.com
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***