It's
actually "NO"
Checking consistency on secondary/copy of the source database does not imply that the source/primary database is free of corruption.
Since, Source and secondary are located in different I/O subsystems involved. right? Which means - consistency checking has to be performed in all environments to examine the actual corruption (I/O Perspective).
Because, None of the SQL Server redundancy technologies propagate the data file pages and I/O subsystem corruptions. Instead - It propagates the Transaction log records to the secondaries. So, there is NO point of performing such a consistency check only in Primary or secondary.
So, performing the consistency check on all the databases in every environment is considered as mandatory!!!
Checking consistency on secondary/copy of the source database does not imply that the source/primary database is free of corruption.
Since, Source and secondary are located in different I/O subsystems involved. right? Which means - consistency checking has to be performed in all environments to examine the actual corruption (I/O Perspective).
Because, None of the SQL Server redundancy technologies propagate the data file pages and I/O subsystem corruptions. Instead - It propagates the Transaction log records to the secondaries. So, there is NO point of performing such a consistency check only in Primary or secondary.
So, performing the consistency check on all the databases in every environment is considered as mandatory!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment