Commerce Server 2007 and Peer to Peer replication

Commerce Server 2007 and Peer to Peer replication

• KIWIDOGGIE

  I'm wondering if a reader/writer scenario makes sense where you make changes on a server and then replicate it out (perhaps using the staging service, or otherwise).

  It's a shame that replication wasn't tested. I agree with you that it's a great cheap clustering solution. I was looking at NSI DoubleTake as a route to go to for that.

  Have you considered other options like partitioning

  • Scaling Out SQL Server 2005

  Cheers,
  Colin

  
  
  

• Mike!

  We do intend to use the staging evironment but the idea of using the load balanced sql farm was to create a more scalable, more available solution.
  

• Ori'

  The core issue you will face is that SQL database replication has not been extensively tested by us so we will not be able to support you in the event that you have problems doing this.

  The recomended approach - and the one heavily tested by us - is to use CSS (staging) for the scenario you describe. You can publish to multiple targets this way and achieve whatever scaleout you are looking for.

  
  

• Samurai Sjakkie

  Ok, that makes a lot of sense. I didn't understand the suggestion the first time was to publish to multiple servers. So we can still have a load balanced pool of sql servers for campaigns and catalog just by using this scenario. What about inventory/profiles/transactions
  

• Alexey Raga

  Replication was not tested and might not work for systems like Catalog, Inventory. Your best bet is to use staging
  

• sammy chen

  Personally PTP and load balancing is the sensible mans solution. If you database architecture can support it its a completely high available solution. Each node can be taken out with out the loss of service, it also can run on cheap hardware and has no recovery time, and failover is limited to only the time it takes your load balancing to realise, whether that be your app, or a load balance appliance.

  
  
  

• GrandpaB

  I understand that suggestion as far as catalogs and campaigns are concerned, but what about transactions/inventory/profiles
  

• Alex Yakhnin - MSFT

  dpv adds a lot more complexity, well too be honest I'm not experienced with them. I thought that with dpv you couldn't afford a server to go down because every server only had part of the data. Obviously with the peer to peer replicated group or just plain load balanced sql farm any one server can go down and not take everything with it...
  

• Nonu_k

  Sean,

  I'm curious - what are you trying to achieve through peer replication

  Cheers,
  Colin

  
  
  

• Michael Hansen

  The short answer is that peer to peer replication combined with load balancing is a poor mans cluster. My company runs the largest apparel retail website in the world for 3 weeks out of the year and we are always growing. When we hit those three weeks out of the year we see tremendous load on our sql server for Commerce Server. Aside from growing our business through our website we have also opened up several other channels. We fulfill orders for other companies and brand them as their own, we also have several different channels besides but the end result is we need to insert orders at the rate of 10k per hour at peak. We want to use commerce server 2007 as our master item maintenance for not only our website but our partners as well, same thing for inventory. We've tried the one monster sql server, specifically a Unisys box for our DB and are not satisfied with how that's worked out.
  
• Commerce Server 2007 and Peer to Peer replication