OpenEdgeExplorerEnjoyer
New Member
Hello,
I have an external system which uses an ODBC connection to periodically retrieve large chunks of data from an OpenEdge database. In order to reduce load on the database and improve overall performance, I have recently introduced Progress Replication Plus to my setup and switched the external system to use the replicated one instead.
A few weeks later I started seeing objects in the external system which do not exist in the OpenEdge database. My suspicion is that those were temporary objects created by some 4GL procedures that were propagated to the replicated database and made their way into the external system, which had no way of knowing not to import them or to eventually delete them. I know for a fact that those non-existent objects were not simply deleted by another user as there is an object change registry maintained in the OpenEdge-based environment.
Is it by any means possible that the replication was configured to use an isolation level (e.g. READ_UNCOMMITTED) which would allow this behavior?
I have an external system which uses an ODBC connection to periodically retrieve large chunks of data from an OpenEdge database. In order to reduce load on the database and improve overall performance, I have recently introduced Progress Replication Plus to my setup and switched the external system to use the replicated one instead.
A few weeks later I started seeing objects in the external system which do not exist in the OpenEdge database. My suspicion is that those were temporary objects created by some 4GL procedures that were propagated to the replicated database and made their way into the external system, which had no way of knowing not to import them or to eventually delete them. I know for a fact that those non-existent objects were not simply deleted by another user as there is an object change registry maintained in the OpenEdge-based environment.
Is it by any means possible that the replication was configured to use an isolation level (e.g. READ_UNCOMMITTED) which would allow this behavior?
Last edited: