Log Shipping or something else?

Here's my scenario.
I have two sql servers, one located in another state, but connected via a
continuous vpn so it really looks like it's always on my network.
I only make changes to the sql server on the remote server, but I want the
local server to be as close as possible to having exactly the same data on
it, for primarily queries, etc.
The local server could be read only I guess, but only if no changes would
need to be made to the queries (MS query mostly).
Would log shipping work' Would something else work better'
Also the remote database is call xxx but my local db will be called yyy, but
it will essentially have the same tables in it.
This is because I have hundreds of queries that reference yyy even though
database xxx is our new database that we're using.
Thanks
Alan SawyerHi,
Do you need the local server for reporting or something ?
With Log shipping your local server is not available for reporting or as a
matter of fact for nothing as it requires an exclusive lock on the database
to restore the log and it will forcibly remove the users or the log shipping
job would fail.
I would say a transactional replication would be a better option. You might
wanna explore more on this.
Also refer to this
[url]http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/pibison/logshippingvsreplication.asp[/u
rl]
Hopefully the above gives you a better idea of what you might do. Do let us
know if you face any problem in setting up the same. I am sure some one will
be able to help you.
Abhishek
"asawyer@.chambersREMOVEbelt.com" wrote:

> Here's my scenario.
> I have two sql servers, one located in another state, but connected via a
> continuous vpn so it really looks like it's always on my network.
> I only make changes to the sql server on the remote server, but I want the
> local server to be as close as possible to having exactly the same data on
> it, for primarily queries, etc.
> The local server could be read only I guess, but only if no changes would
> need to be made to the queries (MS query mostly).
> Would log shipping work' Would something else work better'
>
> Also the remote database is call xxx but my local db will be called yyy, b
ut
> it will essentially have the same tables in it.
> This is because I have hundreds of queries that reference yyy even though
> database xxx is our new database that we're using.
> Thanks
> Alan Sawyer
>|||I definetly need access to the local server, as I want to qurey from it.
I'll take a look at what you suggest.
Alan