Timeline for New foreign key and merge replication
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 11, 2013 at 21:14 | comment | added | Tom Mayfield | What about if you then add the new table to replication? I still get errors even though the new article has been added and a new snapshot created, and I'd prefer to not have to reinitialize. | |
| Jun 11, 2012 at 8:20 | history | bounty awarded | hangy | ||
| Jun 8, 2012 at 11:18 | comment | added | Remus Rusanu | Don't take my comments as 'insight', is more of a speculative educated guess. | |
| Jun 8, 2012 at 11:17 | vote | accept | hangy | ||
| Jun 8, 2012 at 11:16 | comment | added | hangy | I am a bit bummed out that I overlooked this part of the documentation. :) Anyways, your answer explains the behaviour perfectly and even gives some nice insight on why Microsoft has implemented it this way, thank you! I guess I had hoped that the merge replication could be as good with foreign keys in the replication process as it is when building the initial snapshot, which apparently does not contain fks to non-replicated tables. :) | |
| Jun 8, 2012 at 10:41 | history | answered | Remus Rusanu | CC BY-SA 3.0 |