after deleting a publication from the publisher (which gave a message that
it would also delete all subscriptions to it) the subscription remains on
the subscriber. There is no reference to it on the publisher anymore. It
also looks strange on the subscriber, for example the name format listed in
the subscriptions container on the subscriber was something like
serverName:DatabaseName:PublicationName, and is now only
ServerName:DatabaseName, no publication name. I should also note the name of
the sql server alias used to register it with enterprise manager was change
from that of what it was during the original setup of this replication (was
snapshot, by the way). This was a fix I found for an earlier problem when
trying to setup a new merge replication topology... the alias had to be
changed to match the actual server netbios name. I believe I deleted the
publication from the publisher AFTER I edited the subscriber server's alias
name. Could this have something to do with it?
other info: I cannot delete the tables (articles) from the subscriber
because it thinks its still part of the replication (that was deleted). I
also cannot create the new merge replication, or at least I can create it
but it fails since I need to use the same tables which it thinks are
unavailable due to the previously deleted replication scheme.
any guidance is greatly appreciated. I'm in quite the bind here.
thanks.
answered in the post marked urgent problem
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"djc" <dcopenhaver@.megapathdsl.net> wrote in message
news:%23GZNEuaUEHA.1012@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> after deleting a publication from the publisher (which gave a message that
> it would also delete all subscriptions to it) the subscription remains on
> the subscriber. There is no reference to it on the publisher anymore. It
> also looks strange on the subscriber, for example the name format listed
in
> the subscriptions container on the subscriber was something like
> serverName:DatabaseName:PublicationName, and is now only
> ServerName:DatabaseName, no publication name. I should also note the name
of
> the sql server alias used to register it with enterprise manager was
change
> from that of what it was during the original setup of this replication
(was
> snapshot, by the way). This was a fix I found for an earlier problem when
> trying to setup a new merge replication topology... the alias had to be
> changed to match the actual server netbios name. I believe I deleted the
> publication from the publisher AFTER I edited the subscriber server's
alias
> name. Could this have something to do with it?
> other info: I cannot delete the tables (articles) from the subscriber
> because it thinks its still part of the replication (that was deleted). I
> also cannot create the new merge replication, or at least I can create it
> but it fails since I need to use the same tables which it thinks are
> unavailable due to the previously deleted replication scheme.
> any guidance is greatly appreciated. I'm in quite the bind here.
> thanks.
>
|||Running sp_removedbreplication can be used to remove all(ish) traces of
replication in the subscriber database, but obviously must only be done if
this database is not also configured as a publisher. There is also a stored
procedure to tell SQL Server a table is no longer involved in replication
that might be useful: sp_MSunmarkreplinfo which takes the tablename as a
parameter.
Regards,
Paul Ibison
|||thank you! i'll check it out.
"Hilary Cotter" <hilaryk@.att.net> wrote in message
news:uNDdsubUEHA.1764@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> answered in the post marked urgent problem
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>
> "djc" <dcopenhaver@.megapathdsl.net> wrote in message
> news:%23GZNEuaUEHA.1012@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
that[vbcol=seagreen]
on[vbcol=seagreen]
> in
name[vbcol=seagreen]
> of
> change
> (was
when[vbcol=seagreen]
> alias
I[vbcol=seagreen]
it
>
|||great. thank you.
"Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@.Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:%23TQbhNeUEHA.1012@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Running sp_removedbreplication can be used to remove all(ish) traces of
> replication in the subscriber database, but obviously must only be done if
> this database is not also configured as a publisher. There is also a
stored
> procedure to tell SQL Server a table is no longer involved in replication
> that might be useful: sp_MSunmarkreplinfo which takes the tablename as a
> parameter.
> Regards,
> Paul Ibison
>
sql
