reseed required after solving conflicts

I have set-up several replications, all of them working on the same
way. But on the last one a strange thing occured: It seems that when a
conflict is solved by choosing to use the displayed data from the
looser, I need to reseed the identity column.
The replication is working on the merge model. On the two databases,
the identity is not for replication, with different seed ( 1 for the
main database, 2 for the other one) and an increment of 10.
The databases are SQL Server 2000, and the operating system is Windows
2000 server.
Could you please tell me why this reseed is required.
Regards
Patrick
Why do you say you need to reseed the identity column? What error message is
generated?
Or is what happens is that subsequent inserts pick the last inserted value?
For example you have an identity range of 10 on one side 1000 on another.
The 1001 row is merged to the publisher but is logged as a conflict and
rolled back. Then you select this conflict to win, and the 1001 row gets
inserted in the publisher. Then does the publisher's next value start at
1002?
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Patrick" <pmenage@.intnet.mu> wrote in message
news:1160991102.318000.68140@.i3g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
>I have set-up several replications, all of them working on the same
> way. But on the last one a strange thing occured: It seems that when a
> conflict is solved by choosing to use the displayed data from the
> looser, I need to reseed the identity column.
> The replication is working on the merge model. On the two databases,
> the identity is not for replication, with different seed ( 1 for the
> main database, 2 for the other one) and an increment of 10.
> The databases are SQL Server 2000, and the operating system is Windows
> 2000 server.
> Could you please tell me why this reseed is required.
> Regards
> Patrick
>
|||After solving a confict on a table with an identity, I need to ressed
the identity of this table else, the identity of next record inserted
by the application takes the value just after the one of the identity
of the record on which there were conflicts. As there are other exiting
records, it is rejected due to primary key problem. It seems that when
solving a conflict, the seed is changed to the value of the identity of
the record on wich the conflict was solved.
To answer your second question, yes, the publishers's next value start
at 1002.
I set up the identity to start at 1 on the main database and at 2 on
the other database. On both side the increment is 10.
Looking forward to reading your thoughts on the above.
Best Regards
Patrick
Hilary Cotter wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Why do you say you need to reseed the identity column? What error message is
> generated?
> Or is what happens is that subsequent inserts pick the last inserted value?
> For example you have an identity range of 10 on one side 1000 on another.
> The 1001 row is merged to the publisher but is logged as a conflict and
> rolled back. Then you select this conflict to win, and the 1001 row gets
> inserted in the publisher. Then does the publisher's next value start at
> 1002?
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
> positions, strategies or opinions.
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Patrick" <pmenage@.intnet.mu> wrote in message
> news:1160991102.318000.68140@.i3g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...