You get maximum benefit from subscriptionstreams with better hardware. It is
also possible that there is an error in the batch and there are considerable
retries. When there is a batch the subscriptionstreams property drops to 1
until the error is cleared and then increases to the original parameter. You
might be bumping into this problem.
--
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 [quoted text, click to view] "andsm" <andsm@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8D008CC6-2A15-418E-B1DD-FA63A974EBAD@microsoft.com...
>I simulating transactional replication on network with high bandwidth but
> with big latency (it is expected between Chicago and Singapore). I set 400
> ms
> network latency and unlimited network bandwidth, with usage of network
> delay
> simulation software. Next I measure rates at which transactions are
> delivered
> to subscriber from distributor. If set SubscriptionStreams to 2, it
> deliver
> transactions approximately 1.7 times faster than by default
> (SubscriptionStreams = 1). In case if set it to 3 - very small increase
> over
> 2. If set it to 64 - it simply not works, no tranactions were delivered.
> Load
> on subscriber during the tests was very low, was no any CPU or disk IO
> bottlenecks. So, it looks like maximum potential effect from
> SubscriptionStreams is : ~2 times more transaction delivery rate, and
> optimal value of SubscriptionStreams is 2. Anyone have experience of usage
> SubscriptionStreams, any opinions why it happens?