Replication VS Triggers

Posted in 2004

=?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane_Gadoury?= — Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:55:58 -0400 — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C45908.48E27E70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi list, I need to replicated a subset of about 15 tables from IDS V7 towards a SQ= L Server. In that table count, I have 3 tables that are always in the top 1= 0 in terms IO, during the day. I have 2 differents set up, which I could used. 1- Set up triggers on the required tables 2- Set up ER for those tables towards another instance=20 My concern is mainly performance and ease of management (since the data w= ill go populate the sqlserver DB). I would tend to think that setting up 15 triggers with all of them triggering on insert, delete and update would b= e "heavier" on the performance compare to seting up those tables with ER a= nd having replication being set in one direction. Also, since the data would be used to populate the sqlserver, the replication would be easier to manage in case of a crash or any other failures. As usual, comments &/or suggestions are welcome. Thks ! St=E9phane ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C45908.48E27E70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-885= 9-1"> <META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version 6.0.4630.0= "> <TITLE>Replication VS Triggers</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY>  Hi list, I need to replicated a sub= set of about 15 tables from IDS V7 towards a SQL Server. In that table co= unt, I have 3 tables that are always in the top 10 in terms IO, during th= e day. I have 2 differents set up= , which I could used. 1- Set up triggers on the = required tables 2- Set up ER for those ta= bles towards another instance My concern is mainly perfo= rmance and ease of management (since the data will go populate the sqlser= ver DB). I would tend to think that setting up 15 triggers with all of th= em triggering on insert, delete and update would be "heavier" o= n the performance  compare to seting up those tables with ER and hav= ing replication being set in one direction. Also, since the data would= be used to populate the sqlserver, the replication would be easier to ma= nage in case of a crash or any other failures. As usual, comments &/o= r suggestions are welcome. Thks ! St=E9= phane </BODY> </HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C45908.48E27E70-- sending to informix-list

Replication VS Triggers

Related threads

Your privacy choices