1

For years I've been using SQL Server merge replication to replicate a SQL Server with several SQL Server Compact databases that I've had, always having it in the back of my mind that I should probably upgrade/switch to the Microsoft Sync Framework instead.

I decided to start looking into it today, and it looks like it's code hasn't really been updated since 2010 : http://services.community.microsoft.com/feeds/feed/sync_downloads.

Is there a newer, more preferred method out there now, to synchronize data between a full-blown SQL Server and multiple SQL Server Compact databases? The closest I can find right now is SQL Data Sync, but that is for Azure it seems, and I'm not ready for that yet.

marc_s
  • 732,580
  • 175
  • 1,330
  • 1,459
Phil
  • 1,852
  • 2
  • 28
  • 55
  • Sync Framework has many issues, but supports other Technologies than SQL Server, but if that is not requuired, why not stick with Merge Replication? – ErikEJ Aug 27 '12 at 17:45
  • Several reasons actually. Our filters in merge replication have grown complicated over time, and the filtering that merge replication doesn't actually fit all of our needs regardless. Additionally, we very close to the 'maximum recommended amount of subscriptions' for merge replication. I was planning on something that had more powerful control over filtering, and comfortable with > 150 clients – Phil Aug 27 '12 at 22:02
  • Sync Fx is still alive, SQL Data Sync service is actually built on top of it. depending on the type of filtering that you want, Sync Fx filtering out-of-the-box is not that powerful. for example, it doesnt support rows going "in-scope" to a filter or automatically removing rows that fall out of the filter. if your server is remotely located, you will have to write your own WCF infrastructure as well. i suggest you have a look at walkthroughs on Sync Fx and see if its up to your needs. – JuneT Aug 28 '12 at 03:00
  • 1
    Merge replication scales well above 150 subscribers, see Rob Tiffanys book. If you need complex filters, you need to revise your schema. – ErikEJ Aug 28 '12 at 05:45
  • @ErikEJ: 150 subscribers, and maybe more are ok? These subscribers synchronize every 30 seconds, and everything i've heard says I should be moving to synchronization framework. Another reason then is the fact that the SQL compact 4.0 isn't officially supported for merge replication. I've tested and it seems to work, but everything I've read says that I'm not supposed to use it. That and the fact that VS 2012 and sql management studio 2012 can't read a sql 3.5 database(they can only read 4.0 CE) makes it seem like Microsoft isn't planning on supporting compact subscribers much longer. – Phil Aug 28 '12 at 14:09
  • @JuneT: I've played with the Sync framework and made a simpler version of what I'll need before, but never had time until now to fully implement it. Like i said though, it looks like the Sync Framework itself hasn't been updated for 2 years, makes it seems like it isn't really a living library anymore. – Phil Aug 28 '12 at 14:14
  • @ErikEJ: Ah, i just saw http://robtiffany.com/mobile-merge-replication-performance-and-scalability-cheat-sheet/ , and it seems to think up to 400. I thought the frequency of synchronization would make a difference, but i don't see anything about that. Still, the lack of Sql Compact 4.0 support is worrisome. – Phil Aug 28 '12 at 14:19
  • SQL Server 2012 Merge replication is supported with the latest 3.5 SP2 Update. Why is 4.0 support important for you? – ErikEJ Aug 28 '12 at 15:18
  • I'm honestly just going on the theory that 'once functionality has stopped being supported, that means that it's probably being deprecated and i should keep in the back of my mind the need to upgrade eventually'. Besides, like i said if i have a dev machine with visual studio 2012 and sql management 2012 installed on it, i can't use that to work with the 3.5 compact databases. I have to have either sql management 2010 or visual studio 2010 installed as well. Just seems like all signs from microsoft are saying 'hey, don't use this anymore'. – Phil Aug 28 '12 at 15:36

0 Answers0