Applied Changes Detail Record Count vs Audit Table Record count

[Ashs]

Hi Team,

I found strange issue in my qlik replicate task, it is regarding record count shown in 'Applied Changes Detail' vs actual records in audit table on target database. The count for few tables is not matching. I am trying to find out reason behind it. I see that it is not dependent on operation, and found that for update/insert both. I don't see any data errors. I have dropped some columns on target database.

Please suggest any possible reasons behind it. 

[john_wang]

Hello @Ashs ,

Please set SOURCE_CAPTURE/TARGET_APPLY logging components to Verbose first, whenever the problem occurs, check the task log file to understand the root cause. you may need to decrypt the task log file otherwise the data are encrypted.

Make sure to turn off the option "Store trace/verbose logging in memory, but if an error occurs write to the logs":

IN general Qlik Replicate will print the source change records information (eg PK information, SCN/LSN or other stream position as well as transaction IDs etc), and also the target apply information eg if a given record/transaction is applied to target successfully or not. If not, what's the reason or potential cause etc.

If it's hard for you to understand the log file, please open a support ticket with:

1- Task Diag Packages with above logging level

2- Source and target table creation DDL

3- Export the part data from audit table to Excel format and attach to case. It's better to let us know the missing data information eg PK value or characteristic string to identify the given row.

Our support team would gladly help you further.

Regards,

John.

[DesmondWOO]

Hi @Ashs 

Regarding the count discrepancy, could you reproduce this issue? 

Let's say you encountered this issue yesterday. You may create a new task for that particular table only. Enable verbose logging on SOURCE_CAPTURE and TARGET_APPLY and start task from yesterday. Once problem is reproduced, please attach the information that John mentioned before.

Regards.
Desmond

[Ashs]

Thanks, will share the details next week