SQL Server Performance

Database Mirroring VS Database Replication?

Discussion in 'SQL Server 2005 General DBA Questions' started by Siona, Jun 18, 2009.

  1. Siona New Member

    Dear All,
    We have a special requirement like we have around 21 servers across the globe and running few .net application and other OLTP system and also OLAP system.
    Now we are adding one more new application with all the new configuration. As the DB is build is in SQL server 2005, so previously our system is in Replication mode. Now we want to implement the Database Mirroring.
    Before going to proceed I want to know which one is better.
    Database Mirroring or Replication and also reason?
    Cheers!
    Siona
  2. Sandy New Member

    Dear Seeona, you can check this link: http://www.sqlmag.com/Article/ArticleID/95294/sql_server_95294.html
    Can you also tell us few question answer as per the links then we can guide you better.
    Qst:
    • Do you need to protect individual databases rather than the entire server?
    • Do you need guaranteed zero data loss?
    • Do you need automatic failover without the expense of a cluster?
    • Do you need the capabilities of a cluster across a long distance?
    • Do you need transactional replication without the complicated support headaches?
    • Do you need a high-availability solution that’s easy to implement, pause, stop, restart and configure?
    • Do you need a quick high-availability solution but have little or no budget?
    Thank you,
    Sandy.
  3. Siona New Member

    Thank you, Sandy. Nice Article.
    I would like to go with Database Mirroring rather than Replication.
    Find My Answer:
    • Do you need to protect individual databases rather than the entire server? - YES (Its Imp)
      • Do you need guaranteed zero data loss? (100% Agree)
        • Do you need automatic failover without the expense of a cluster? (Yes)
          • Do you need the capabilities of a cluster across a long distance? (Yes)
            • Do you need transactional replication without the complicated support headaches? (Yes, it should be)
              • Do you need a high-availability solution that’s easy to implement, pause, stop, restart and configure? (Yes, Sure)
                • Do you need a quick high-availability solution but have little or no budget? (Definitely)

              • Please Advice?
                Cheers!
                Siona
  4. jbates99 Member

    Siona,

    I highly recommend 2005's Mirroring. It is easy to configure. And once in production, it is stable and reliable. I like it.

    John
  5. satya Moderator

    In any case for the easy management of high availability I also vouch Database Mirroring, but keep in mind it has per database and if your SQL instance is already a resource intensive & transactional then you may have to consider the number of databases to include in mirroring.
    Also you can have mix & match of Replication and Mirroring, lets say if you have 10 databases and out them only 4 are important for application/availability then you can put them for mirroring. Within remaining 6 database if 3 are essential support for application then you can put them in replication.
    I would like to get an idea on the hardware & number of databases, capacity and any counters on the growth of data in next 3 years, based on that it will be easy to suggest the suitable high availability option for your platform.

Share This Page