But, if you run a transaction that is truly minimally logged (BCP in
bulk-logged recovery model), you will have to reinitialize.
I don't understand why that is considered "bad". A minimally logged
transaction does not write everything to the tran log. Therefore, if you
were allowed to backup the tran log and restore it, you would wind up with a
corrupted database. With respect to replication, a minimally logged
transaction doesn't even hit the replication engine, so your publisher and
subscriber will completely out of synch and since there is no track of the
data, there is no ability to resynch them except by reinitializing.
(Replication doesn't even detect that a minimally logged transaction
occured.)
This is not an issue for either replication or log shipping. It is a side
effect of the way the transaction was executed. The replication and log
shipping features are simply protecting the integrity of the databases
against something they can not control.
--
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
[quoted text, click to view] "Paul Ibison" <Paul.Ibison@Pygmalion.Com> wrote in message
news:OMFC2BDLGHA.648@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> John,
> it is my understanding that in the full recovery model, every change to
> the database is logged, so there's no issue with transactional
> replication. In SQL Server 2005 the transaction log may be backed up after
> minimally logged operations (eg Bulk load operations in the bulk-logged
> model) so log shipping is also possible.
> Cheers,
> Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP,
www.replicationanswers.com > (recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
>
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
>