SQL Server 2005, MS Access Merge Replication?

SQL Server 2005, MS Access Merge Replication?

• ecardenas

  Yes, I would roll back to SQL 2000. I'd prefer not to but I would. SQL 2000 uses less overhead than SQL 2005 on my development machine and production server, for one.
  
  Secondly, the SQL Express edition cannot be used on older laptops. Its system requirements are simply too high. I have multiple machines that are taken into the field and used (abused :) ) on a regular basis. They don't come near those requirements. The cost of replacing them is prohibitive for a small company like ours. Access, for it's many faults, has a much smaller footprint. It runs fairly well on those machines and we already own it.
  
  Thirdly, I assume SQL Express will not be free forever. Not knowing what it will cost me in the future to keep using it makes me nervous.
  
  Depreciating this feature (SQL Server to Access replication) shows a slight disconnect with the reality of small businesses who have small budgets. Hahahaha...sorry...I'll stop that train of thought before it becomes a rant!
  
  Thanks for your help! I appreciate it...
  - Erik
  
  

• Lenin82

  What version of SQL Server are you using This feature has been deprecated in SQL Server 2005. Here is a pointer to the old documentation

  http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp url=/library/en-us/replsql/replhet_956b.asp

  Have you considered merge replication to SQL Express subscribers, this is a great scalable solution.

  Thanks

  Nabila Lacey

  
  

• needhelp1111

  Good day!
  
  It's SQL 2005. I can roll it back to SQL 2000 is SQL 2005 doesn't support the feature as well.
  
  Thanks for the link! I'd looked all over the place for that. The keyword "Access" is hard to search for, because it's used in so many contexts.
  
  - Erik
  
  

• Pedro.net

  EMathy wrote:

  Thirdly, I assume SQL Express will not be free forever. Not knowing what it will cost me in the future to keep using it makes me nervous. ... ... Depreciating this feature (SQL Server to Access replication) shows a slight disconnect with the reality of small businesses who have small budgets.

  Hi Eric, I have to disagree with your statement. For businesses with small budgets, SQL Express gives you the basic functionality of a relational db engine for free. I don't see how this is a disadvantage for small businesses with small budgets.

  
  

• Kevin C. Kelly

  There are so many new features in SQL 2005 that makes merge replication a great solution.

  Here is a link listing some of the replication enhancements in this release http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms170959(SQL.90).aspx

  and here is some information on replication to Express subscribers http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms165686.aspx

  As Merge to Access is a deprecated feature do you really need to rollback to SQL 2000

  Thanks

  Nabila Lacey

  
  

• Gareth Welch

  OK, after re-reading your post, I may have misinterpreted what you were trying to say. Unfortunately when features are deprecated, it will affect some customers who still want or need to use it. At the same time we understand it will prevent customers from purchasing/upgrading. It's a give/take, hopefully a better one for the long run.

  At the same time, I hope at some point the cost of upgrading hardware/software will be justified by the benefits you get from the newer features/benefits in the software, although I know this isn't always going to be the case.

  
  
• SQL Server 2005, MS Access Merge Replication?