|
Posted by Tibor Karaszi on 12/16/05 18:43
You can get all the queuing infrastructure for free. SQL Server 2005 includes a functionality called
"Service Broker", where your trigger does SEND to write to the queue and the service uses RECEIVE to
read off of the queue.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Laurence Breeze" <i.l.breeze@open.ac.uk> wrote in message news:43A2EAFC.5020500@open.ac.uk...
> I'd like to build an application that will react to specific changes to data in a set of tables in
> a database. The application would replicate these data changes to another database. The target
> database won't be SQLServer. Neither is this simple replication, at times the application will
> need to get extra data from the source database before the target is updated.
>
> In other DBMS systems I am involved with the DBMS has the facilty to write to an application
> message queue so that the monitoring application only has to monitor the queue rather than a
> database. What I'd like to do is something like this:
>
> 1. Some application changes data in a table.
> 2. A trigger reacts to the change and writes a message to an application queue.
> 3. A windows service/process monitors the queue and picks up the message. It then carries out
> whatever replication/DB actions are necessary.
>
> This would mean defining a number of new triggers on existing tables and developing the windows
> service/process. Existing applications and the existing tables in the database would remain
> unchanged. I'm not a windows programmer but I have someone in my team who is and who will build
> the windows service/process.
>
> The bit I'm unsure about is how a trigger can write to an application queue or communicate with
> the windows service/process. I may be using the wrong terminology as I have more knowledge of
> Unix than Windows.
>
> Could anyone help with how I can do this or suggest any alternative strategies.
>
> Thanks In Advance.
>
> Laurence
>
[Back to original message]
|