Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I can't understand the difference between transactional replication and merge replication. This is my scenario: In an organization I have a SQL server which need to collect information from different sql servers which are located in different parts of organization or around the city and some report will create according to gathered information. Data in different SQL servers update every 5 or 6 minutes. I don't know should I use transactional or merge replication?

share|improve this question

Transactional replication is more like real-time, but you have to have a constant or near constant connection between the subscriber databases and the publisher databases. Changes are made to the publisher database only and then those changes are pushed out to the subscriber databases.

Merge replication is different. Both databases can be updated independently, then, at scheduled intervals, the data is compared, and merged. If there are inconsistencies, those are resolved depending on the algorithm you set when you set up the replication. It's slower, but better for applications that aren't centrally hosted.

share|improve this answer

Merge. Each site is a master of it's own data.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.