|
Posted by Dan Guzman on 10/03/06 11:46
One of the downsides to replication is that is complicates subsequent schema
changes. As ML mentioned, you need to run the appropriate sp_repl* procs
instead of ALTER TABLE. The details vary depending on the type of
replication and the changes you are making.
If your client established replication outside the scope of your normal
support agreement, I suggest you have then remove replication so that your
normal script can be run and then reestablish replication afterwards. It's
unreasonable to expect your upgrade script to handle a replicated schema
unless you have detailed knowledge of the replication topology.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Giacomo" <no_spam@grazie.it> wrote in message
news:op.tgt5pk06t6znx9@tpprog002.ccvtech.com...
> I've no more code sample to post, it's just a script with some ALTER TABLE
> to change columns name or type.
> We use this script to update client's DB. But one of them use replication
> and we are always in trouble to update this DB.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|