4

I'm trying to work out why one article within a publication isn't replicating. I've scripted it out and confirmed the replication procs it's supposed to call are the correct ones, and have run a trace on the destination instance looking for those procs being called - no results.

Querying the sysarticles view in the published database, I noticed the article in question has a status of 57, whereas the rest of the articles have a status of 17.

Looking at msdb, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms174970(v=sql.90).aspx, there are 5 bitwise values available: 1, 8, 16, 24, 64.

So it makes sense that the articles with status 17 are made up of 1 and 16 above.

But even if I add all bitwise values above excluding 64, I can't get a status value of 57. The max is 49.

Can anyone please explain to me what a status of 57 is, and whether it could be the cause of my article not replicating.

Thankfully this isn't on production, so I'm going to try and update the status manually, and if that doesn't work, take the table out of replication and add it again as its own publication.

But it would be good to understand what a status of 57 means.

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

I'm not sure what that status value means, but most of my articles are listed with status 57 and they are working just fine.

I'm guessing that there's a bitwise value of 32 which is missing (why else go from 16 to 64) and I'm guessing that 24 should actually be 32 as 24 isn't a valid bitwise value.

57 = 1+8+16+32

I'll see if I can get it confirmed that the 24 should actually be 32.

Improve this answer
5
  • 1
    If you read the description of 8, 16, and 24, it is clear that 24 is meant to be a combination of 8 and 16. I think the description is simply redundant
    – Matt M
    Commented Aug 17, 2011 at 13:05
  • True, the description of 24 does make it look like a combination of 8 and 16. I've got an email into the product group to see what the value of 32 should be. Hopefully they'll get back to me shortly.
    – mrdenny
    Commented Aug 17, 2011 at 19:49
  • I am definitely interested in what they say. I have a process that scripts out our replication environment for DR reasons, and have always just included the 32 bit in the bitmask, as all of my articles contain it.
    – Matt M
    Commented Aug 17, 2011 at 20:40
  • Thanks guys. Yea, makes sense there's a missing 32 bit value. I ended up taking that article out of the publication and setting up a new one and it's working. I also checked prod (should've done it earlier!) and that article is status 57 and replicating fine.
    – EmJay
    Commented Aug 17, 2011 at 23:24
  • 13 years later and Microsoft is still not defining what 32 means. Interesting...
    – Abraham
    Commented Feb 26 at 20:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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