Problem with Synchronize(): The specified table does not exist. [ __syncArticles ] RRS feed

  • Question

  • I just created a small client application that synchronizes SQL Server CE with SQL Server 2008. It is a small test and it just tries to synchronize one table. Once I set up everything right following the documentation from MDSN, I run the program and execute:

    syncAgent.Synchronize() I get the this exception: "The specified table does not exist. [ __syncArticles ]"

    It is something weird because the __syncTransactions table is created in my SQLCompact database but there is no __syncArticles nor anything else (apart from the table I want to sync).

    I included the statement CreateDatabaseIfNotExist=True in the localProvider but it does not make any change to the exception.

    Does anybody have the same problem?.

    Thanks for having a look at this and helping if possible.


    Monday, October 4, 2010 10:35 AM


All replies

  • Hey Jordi,

    Which version of SyncFx and SQL server CE do you use? SyncFX 2.1 needs to work with SQL CE 3.5 sp2. 


    Ann Tang
    Monday, October 4, 2010 7:04 PM
  • Hi Ann,

    I am using SynFx 2.1 and SQL CE 3.5 sp2 (the one that comes with SQLServer 2008 R2).




    Tuesday, October 5, 2010 8:15 AM
  • Here is the link to one Toturial : Sync SQL server to SQL CE. You could check it out and see if those may work for your scenario.http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff928494(v=SQL.110).aspx .



    Ann Tang
    • Marked as answer by Jordi DG Wednesday, October 6, 2010 10:46 AM
    Tuesday, October 5, 2010 6:02 PM
  • Hi Ann,

    it was very helpful thanks very much, I managed to fix changes download (Server -> Client) but I still have problems with changes upload (Server <- Client).

    When performing the synchronization the total changes upload has always the same value, even though there are no changes available from the client it still displays the same number. I did not change a single line of code of the walkthroughs (I just modified the connection strings of both databases).

    It is a different approach to my issue and If I fix the latest thing I encountered would be huge.

    Your idea was very helpful even though I found that latest problem.

    Thanks a lot,



    Wednesday, October 6, 2010 10:46 AM
  • Well it was something regarding the database types more than the synchronization itself.

    The answer you gave me works great!,

    Thanks a lot Ann,



    Wednesday, October 6, 2010 1:54 PM
  • Hi,

    Does anyone know what __syncTransaction table is used for? 

    Please refer to following link to view the issue that I have been having with my syncing process:



    Tuesday, October 11, 2011 3:15 AM