DB Read only Copy

I am hoping to get some guidance on the best approach for a read only copy of a database that is ~ 1TB. 
The primary database is fed nightly with an ETL process. 
We are currently trying to duplicate the ETL to read only server but that process is not going well. 
So we are looking at other options to let SQL make the copy.
The primary database is on a Win12R2 with SQL 12 or 14, a 2 node A/P failover cluster.
The read only copy will be on a Win12R2 with SQL 12 or 14. 
It is not a requirement to fail over to the read only copy if the primary should go down.
What would best the approach to accomplish the end result?

Does it mean if the primary goes down you do not want users connect to the the second server where the read only db is located? Do you want to refresh the rad only db on basic period or keep it sync with the primary db?
Simple backup/restore + SSIS over to the second server may work very well.
Best Regards,Uri Dimant SQL Server MVP,
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/uri_dimant/
MS SQL optimization: MS SQL Development and Optimization
MS SQL Consulting:
Large scale of database and data cleansing
Remote DBA Services:
Improves MS SQL Database Performance
SQL Server Integration Services:
Business Intelligence

Similar Messages

  • Mail, how to move and "mark as read" only copied mail?, Mail, how to move and "mark as read" only copied mail?

    Hi, I need a help to make a folder-backup (using a limited-size Exchange mailbox ... )
    Is there a way, using Rules/Filter for Mail to:
    copy a mail to a specific folder
    mark as read only the copied mail
    If I write this rule, the mail is copied, but both mail are mark-as-read and I cannot find what I need to read.
    Thanks.

    But this marks the message as read also in Thunderbird.

  • The options to replicate a secondary read-only copy of a big database with limited network connection?

    There is a big database on remote server. A read-only replicate is required on a local server. The data can only be transferred via FTP, etc. It's ok to replicate it once a day.
    Logshipping is an option. However, it need to kill all the connections when doing restoring. What's the other options (pros/cons)? How about merge repl or .Net sync framework?

    Hi
    ydbn,
    Do you need to update data on the local server and propagate those changes to remote server? If no, you can use log shipping or transaction replication achieve your requirement.  It doesn’t need to kill all the connections if you
    clear the Disconnect users in the database when restoring backups check box when configuring log shipping,
    With transaction replication, the benefits are as follows.
    Synchronization. This method can be used to keep multiple subscribers synchronized in real time.
    Scale out. Transactional replication is excellent for scenarios in which read-only data can be scaled
    out for reporting purposes or to enable e-commerce scalability (such as providing multiple copies of product catalogs).
    There are a few disadvantages of utilizing transaction replication, including:
        • Schema changes/failover. Transactional subscribers require several schema changes that impact foreign keys and impose other constraints.
        • Performance. Large-scale operations or changes at the publisher might require a long time to reach subscribers.
    However, if you need to update data on the local server and propagate those changes to remote server, merge replication
     is more appropriate, and it comes with the following advantages:
        • Multi-master architecture. Merge replication does allow multiple master databases. These databases can manage their own copies of data and marshal those changes as needed between other members of
    a replication topology.
        • Disconnected architecture. Merge replication is natively built to endure periods of no connectivity, meaning that it can send and receive changes after communication is restored.
        • Availability. With effort on the part of the developers, merge-replicated databases can be used to achieve excellent scale-out and redundancy options.
    Merge replication comes with some disadvantages, including:
        • Schema changes. Merge replication requires the existence of a specialized GUID column per replicated table.
        • Complexity. Merge replication needs to address the possibility for conflicts and manage operations between multiple subscribers, which makes it harder to manage. For more details, please review this
    article.
    For the option of sync framework, I would like to recommend you post the question in the Sync Framework forums at
    https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/home?category=sync . It is appropriate and more experts will assist you. Also you can check this
    article about introduction to Sync Framework database synchronization.
    Thanks,
    Lydia Zhang
    If you have any feedback on our support, please click
    here.
    Lydia Zhang
    TechNet Community Support

  • Is data passed back to responder a read-only copy?

    I have a service that I call, adding a responder:
    var modelingDataResponder:IResponder = new
    ModelingDataResponder();
    var modelingDataService:DataService =
    EnterpriseServiceLocator.getInstance().getDataService("ModelingDataService");
    var token:AsyncToken = modelingDataService.fill(myModel,
    clientName);
    token.addResponder(modelingDataResponder);
    This causes the variable myModel to be filled. It adds a
    responder called modelingDataResponder which implements IResponder.
    modelingDataResponder is called when the fill completes.
    My question is this. modelingDataResponder is called with
    data that's a copy of the myModel object that was filled. But it
    seems to be only a copy. It seems like executing code inside
    modelingDataResponder that changes data fields inside the parameter
    that is passed in just changes the data in a local copy, not in the
    myModel object that was filled. The two objects have separate
    addresses when looked at in the debugger, and changing a value in
    one has no effect on the other.
    So it's like the data that is passed back is a copy. The copy
    can be read. Writing in the copy is OK, but it is just writing on a
    copy, on on the object that was filled. Right?

    - Since what version of LCDS is this issue resolved?
    LCDS 3.0 and above.
    - Is their  a Jira issue for this?
    No, as we use an private bug tracking system for LCDS.
    - Is a patch available?
    No, sorry.  You would have to work through Adobe Technical support to get a hotfix for this, and I do not believe that one exists.  I would recommend upgrading to 3.1 if you can.
    Tom

  • Permissions sticking to read-only when folders copied to local drive

    Hello! So... I have a sharepoint that is read-only (archived jobs) everything works fine, but when people copy a folder to their local drive, they are forced to enter the server admin password when they try to move it to the their trash. If they copy individual files, they can erase those, but folders are retaining the server's permissions.
    Everyone is on 10.5.6, I tried making the group both POSIX and ACL and it didn't make a difference.
    Is there a fix? THanks - Don

    Please provide a read-out of your file stricture using *ls -ela* for the directory in question, and showing a file that, when copied, becomes read-only.
    Generally speaking, when a file is copied, the copy's permissions are set like this:
    * The POSIX permissions are preserved. So if they are rw-rw-r-- (0664), then they remain that way on the copy. Note that umask behavior would put those at rw-r--r-- (0644) by default.
    * The POSIX owner is changed to the action-bearing user. The action-bearing user is the one that performs the copy, so that's typically the currently logged-in user. Where the user is defined (either locally or via remote directory does not matter.)
    * The POSIX group is changed to match the POSIX group assigned to the copy's parent folder.
    * Any explicit ACLs will be preserved on the copy, if the destination filesystem supports them. (Destination filesystem ACL support is turned on in 10.5 client by default, but not in 10.4 or 10.3 client.)
    * Any inherited ACLs as defined on the original will not be set on the copy.
    * The copy will inherit any inheritable ACLs as defined on its new parent.
    Now I'll take a wild guess: Since you're having this problem with 10.4 and 10.3 clients, I'm thinking that the POSIX permissions of the original file have the POSIX owner set to read-only. This would produce a read-only copy because the POSIX permissions are preserved! There is a reason for the default umask and create masks that set POSIX owner to read and write!
    Of course, if this is the case, then the copy's POSIX owner can change the permissions on it and open it with read-write access.
    --Gerrit

  • SQL Server 2012 - Wat Is The Best Solution For Creating a Read Only Replicated/AlwaysOn Database

    Hi there I was wondering if someone may have a best recommendation for the following requirement I have with regards setting up a third database server for reporting?
    Current Setup
    SQL Server 2012 Enterprise setup at two sites (Site A & Site B).
    Configured to use AlwaysOn Availability groups for HA and DR.
    Installed on Windows 2012 Servers.
    This is all working and failover works fine and no issues. So…
    Requirement
    A third server needs to be added for the purpose of reporting, to be located on another site (Site C) possibly in another domain. This server needs to have a replicated read only copy of the live database from site A or Site B, whichever is in use. The Site
    C reporting database should be as up-to-date to the Site A or Site B database as possible – preferably within a few seconds anyway….
    Solution - What I believe are available to me
    I believe I can use AlwaysOn and create a ReadOnly replica for the Site C. If so do I assume Site C needs to have the Enterprise version of SQL server i.e. to match Site A & Site B?
    Using log shipping which if I am correct means the Site C does not need to be an Enterprise version.
    Any help on the best solution for this would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks, Steve

    for always on - all nodes should be part of one windows cluster..if there site C is on different domain - I do not think it works.
    Logshipping works --as long as the sql on site C is is same or higher version(sql 2012 or above).  you can only do read only.
    IMHo, if you can make site C in the same domain then, Always is better solution else log shipping
    also, if your database has enterprise level features such as - partitonin, data compression -- you cannot restore the database on lower editions- so you need to have enterprise edition.
    Hope it Helps!!

  • Cant open same excel file when it is already open by another user (cant open read only)

    We have been having an issue for a while now where if a user has an network saved
    excel document open, another user cannot open it at all. We get the error
    "Sorry we couldn't find your file. Is it possible it was moved, renamed or deleted?"
    and/or simple "Could not Open _____" errors when this happens. We should certainly be able to open a read only copy at the least but office doesn't even give an option to do so. We are using office '07 Pro Plus. Thanks.

    We have been having an issue for a while now where if a user has an network saved
    excel document open, another user cannot open it at all. We get the error
    "Sorry we couldn't find your file. Is it possible it was moved, renamed or deleted?"
    and/or simple "Could not Open _____" errors when this happens. We should certainly be able to open a read only copy at the least but office doesn't even give an option to do so. We are using office '07 Pro Plus. Thanks.
    I'm facing the same issue.  Started only when my machine was upgraded from XP Pro to Win 7 Ent. Office 2010 is the version.  Hoping someone as a answer.
    Thanks.

  • MS Word: This file is read-only. To save a copy, click OK, and give the document a new name in the save dialog box.

    This is not a question. I believe I've found a new issue and the fix for it.
    The situation:
    A brand new iMac 27" running Yosemite 10.10.1
    MacMini server running 10.8.5 server.
    The issue:
    Client on iMac trying to work on MS Word documents stored on server was requiring him to save the documents to his desktop and then copy them back to the folder on the server. The exact error message was, "This file is read-only. To save a copy, click OK, and give the document a new name in the save dialog box."
    The issue is unique to this computer in an office of 10 client computers and three servers.
    Attempted fixes:
    Verified that the ".Temporaryitems" folder existed and the permissions were set properly.
    Repaired permissions on the client and the network share.
    Definitive fix:
    By default, Yosemite 10.10.1 uses SMB for connecting file shares. When I overrode the default and switched to AFP protocol, the issue went away.
    I hope this helps someone else.
    Rob

    That was it. What an operating system. It is very helpful to view files you are looking for. But if you have preview on you cannot save files.

  • Can't copy files from NTFS volume with Read Only permissions?

    I am trying to copy files from an NTFS volume used previously for Windows onto another volume which is Mac OS X Extended...
    However, certain files fail to copy due to the fact that I 'don't have permission to access some of the items'...
    So I found the items which are causing the issue and viewed the permissions for them which display as 'You can only read'... I presume I am correct taking these as read-only permissions which (to my knowledge) should allow the files/folders to be copied accross to a new volume assuming that the existing volume is left without any changes attempted.
    So can anyone suggest to me why this is? And how I might rectify the issue?
    Thanks in advance

    Ok I've just worked out that 'You can only read' is referring to the fact that I can only view permissions but not add any. Below this statement, no permissions are listed which may explain why I cannot access the files but does not explain why I can copy/access some files, also with no permissions...

  • External Harddisk read only after the system hand during I copy some folders to my external drive.

    I'm using macbook pro mid 2010.
    I could not write my external HDD 1TB (WD) after I copying the folder from local folder to external folder via my parallel desktop.
    During the copying, the system hang halfway and no choice i terminate the copy. SInce that, i could not write my HDD either from OSX or via parallel desktop.
    When i check the infer, the HDD shown read only. I truing to use the disk utility to verify the disk but I could not click on the button.
    Appreciate someone could advice me beside backup and reformat the HDD.
    Thank you!

    I've got the same problem here with a Seagate external HD. I've been able to install Leopard on another Western Digital HD and boot from it to copy some files to a newly purchased external, but in Leopard I can't copy my 180GB music library because of several errors. It either says that the file names cannot be copied because they are too similar to another file name (accidental dupes in the library) or that the names are too long to be copied and neither make any sense. I'm trying to figure out how to move all of my music over without having to go through it file by file and without losing anything.
    I was able to easily copy all other information from the hard drive; the music is the last remaining item I need before I reformat the external and use it in Snow Leopard as a TM backup drive.

  • Permissions "read only" after copying files FROM server

    Hi everyone!
    OK, just setup a Leopard server. Clients all at Tiger - level..for now. This is what I want to do:
    I want a read only - network library drive so that the clients can grab files from but then modify locally on their machines. No need to put back on that server as I have another system in place for things like that.
    *The problem:* If I propagate permissions at "read only" then when the user copies to their local drives, the owner changes but the permissions remain. They have to manually change the permissions back to match their local, then they can work with the file. When we're talking about hundreds of files for 15+ users a day, then it is quite a pain and a show stopper.
    I had this setup previously on a panther server with no trouble. I've maintained settings as close as possible but still having trouble.
    Any ideas as to what I'm missing?
    FYI- I don't want to change permissions to read/write to protect the library from tampering.
    thanks

    +If I propagate permissions at "read only" then when the user copies to their local drives, the owner changes but the permissions remain.+
    OK, from your description, you'd have to have the POSIX owner's permissions set to just read-only or read and execute. As you've observed, a copy obtains permissions in the following manner:
    The POSIX owner changes to match the account performing the copy (the action-bearing account), and the POSIX group is inherited from the copy's destination parent. The POSIX permissions stay the same, though. (Inherited ACL entries on the original are also lost; explicitly-defined ones are preserved, and new inherited entries apply to the copy from its destination parent.)
    All of this is proper behavior, and there's an easy way to make it work to suit your needs.
    Since the POSIX owner changes to the action-bearing account for the copy, you'll want to ensure that the original POSIX owner's permissions are read and write. This does not require that you make the original's POSIX owner the same as that of the action-bearing account. An example would better illustrate the situation:
    Example POSIX Permissions for the Original on the server:
    Owner root can read and write
    Group somegroup can only read
    Everyone else can only read
    Thus, let's say that tsmith is the action-bearing account. So tsmith copies the file to his desktop, and the POSIX permissions now look like this:
    Owner tsmith can read and write
    Group staff can only read
    Everyone else can only read
    Thus, tsmith receives the POSIX permissions of the POSIX group or everyone else field on the server - let's say there are no ACLs for the time being - and he becomes the owner of the copy. Since the original owner, root on the server, had read and write permissions, those permissions are preserved and given to tsmith for the copy.
    Another way to deal with this situation would be to use ACLs by placing an inheritable ACL granting full control or read and write for tsmith on his home folder. Any new items copied to or created in his home folder would inherit that ACL. Similarly, an inherited ACL deny entry (but not an explicitly-set entry) affecting tsmith and the delete and delete_child controls could be placed on the affected server share point's top-level before the original was copied there. Then, any subsequent copies from the server volume would drop this inherited ACL entry entirely. These would, however, be much more complicated situations, and your scenario is best handled in the POSIX-only fashion. (This doesn't mean that you have to disable ACLs on the server - just don't apply them for the share point!)
    --Gerrit
    search:Owner read only

  • How do I protect File (read and copy only)

    I have created a photo file that I want my kids to be able to see and copy( make an imovie or slideshow with)but not write onto. This way as I update the file with more pictures I can copy the new items over easily without creating copies of pictures. The file size is currently 250GB and to re-write the entire folder each time takes 8 hours and it might only take minutes if it only has to write the new pics. My hope is to be able to drag the file onto their drive and then for the system to ask if I want to replace or ignore existing files and just write the new ones. I want to be the only one that has the capability to do this. Help

    If you control their Apple menu -> System Preferences -> Accounts to have parental controls, you can keep that file inside a read only folder that you create for them to access. That's true for nearly every version of Mac OS X.
    If you are able to boot into Mac OS 9 on any of your machines, you will have to setup those accounts to boot via Apple -> Control Panels -> Users and Groups to have read only folders.
    Secure your account with a password that no one can guess. Birthdays, names, foreign language words are not good passwords. A mixture of consonants, numbers, and symbols are best, and at a minimum 8 characters.

  • .xls' is read only. To save a copy

    We have some clients who are experiencing this error message in office 2010:
    <path>\<filename>.xls' is read only. To save a copy, click OK, then give the workbook a new name in the Save As dialog box.
    Is there anyway to fix this?
    We've run the registry fixes
    [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\14.0\Common\Internet]
    "OpenDocumentsReadWriteWhileBrowsing"=dword:00000001
    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\WebClient\Parameters]
    "BasicAuthLevel"=dword:00000002
    [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\WebClient\Parameters]
    "BasicAuthLevel"=dword:00000002

    This is a common message when you have some trouble in saving Excel documents. Modify the registry key value is not our best choice.
    The following article describes how to troubleshoot issues that may occur when you save Microsoft Excel files:
    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/271513/en-us
    Let us know the result and feel free to post back. Thanks.
    Tony Chen
    TechNet Community Support

  • Make flash drive read only with no copying

    Here is the Situation. I have a 2h video of a high school play that i am editing and selling but with final cut you can only export 480 p video on dvd so i am going to sell hd digital copies on flash drives my question is can i make it so that the flash drive are read only and copy protected so it can't be distributed can i format  the flahs drive insuch a way  a way that prevents copying?

    jfoppes wrote:
    …  can i format  the flahs drive insuch a way  a way that prevents copying?
    technicallly, to playback you have to 'copy' content (from stick/disk/whatever to device) ....
    So, the harder you make it to 'copy protect' your content, the more inconvenient it gets for your paying customers!
    for example, on commercial DVDs I'm 'forced' to watch minutes of promos and 'legal advice', talking to me like I'm a 1st degree suspect No fun! And: When I like to watch/listen on diff. devices. again trouble to 'rip' it (anyone remembering the first slogan for iTunes? "Rip.Mix.Burn." Holy innocence ........... LOL
    Forget the few copy-cats. Convince by quality (e.g. spelling ) .
    Deliver an excellent product, perhaps bundled with some 'extras' (a nice designed box, with pics/t-shirt/memorabilia/…)  And, hey - who copies a school-play????

  • TS1550 Back up to time machine failed.  Error, "Files can't be copied onto the backup disk because it appears to be read-only". Back up has been working.  drive is not read only.  How do I fix this?

    Back up to time machine failed.  Error, "Files can’t be copied onto the backup disk because it appears to be read-only". Back up has been working.  drive is not read only.  How do I fix this?

    Hello,
    http://pondini.org/TM/C6.html

Maybe you are looking for