Sync vs Merge Replication : Sync scheme changes RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hello,

    I am very excited about the Sync Framework, but I think that I may have found a show stopper for using it in our application...  The Sync website compared Sync with SQL Server Merge Replication and one of the areas that they differed was in handling scheme changes: Sync does not handle it; Merge Replication will handle it.  Since database schemes evolved over time, and there could be hundreds of notebooks with their own replicated databases, it seems like this issue could be very common, so I am surprised that Sync won't handle it.  We definitely do not want to have to have our users download a patching program every time a change is made to the database structure.  So, I am wondering if this is a show stopper, or, perhaps, I have outdated information.  How are others using Sync to handle database structure changes?  Or, are they using Replication Management Objects instead of Sync?  I'd really appreciate your input on this question. 

    Will either technology work with synchronizing SQL Server 2008 with SQL Server 2008 Express?  Most often, I see references with SQL Server 2008 and CE...

    We need to filter the data being synchronized so each team gets its own rows from a common set of tables.  It seems that Merge Replication permits this kind of filtering; Does Sync?

    If we have to use Merge Replication, is it dreadfully slow vs. Sync?  Most of our users will be synchronizing through the Internet.

    Thank you very much for taking time to read my questions and for any help that you can give me.

    Tuesday, February 23, 2010 7:39 AM


All replies