Publish Subscription replication - Side effects?

Hi Guys,

I've been given the task of creating a disaster recovery "replica" of a
production SQL server and keeping it current.
(SQL 2000)

At first we thought of using scripts to do a backup/restore method.
But a couple of the databases are upwards of a hundred gigabytes...
A bit hard on drive space.

I thought a better method would be to replicate the databases using the
Publish and "push subscriptions".
I'm not very knowledgeable about SQL management, However with the help of
Google and a little time,
I mamnaged to make it work experimentally with the Northwind database.
But that's tiny compared to the live DBs

My question is:
Am I likely to see any 'unforseen' side effects of replicating by this
method?

Thanks,
Jim

To keep maximum performance on your main SQL Server I would consider
"pulling" the transactionally replicated data.

This article from Microsoft has alot of great tips on how to maximize
replication performance.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/tranrepl.mspx

If you have money for a nice SAN unit you can check out Split Mirroring.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/spltmirr.mspx



--

/*
Warren Brunk - MCITP,MCTS,MCDBA
www.techintsolutions.com
*/


"Jim Millar" wrote in message

> Hi Guys,
>
> I've been given the task of creating a disaster recovery "replica" of a
> production SQL server and keeping it current.
> (SQL 2000)
>
> At first we thought of using scripts to do a backup/restore method.
> But a couple of the databases are upwards of a hundred gigabytes...
> A bit hard on drive space.
>
> I thought a better method would be to replicate the databases using the
> Publish and "push subscriptions".
> I'm not very knowledgeable about SQL management, However with the help of
> Google and a little time,
> I mamnaged to make it work experimentally with the Northwind database.
> But that's tiny compared to the live DBs
>
> My question is:
> Am I likely to see any 'unforseen' side effects of replicating by this
> method?
>
> Thanks,
> Jim
>