|
|
You're in the
sql server clustering
group:Active/Active Clustering - W2K - Adding More Instances
sql server clustering:
is running MS SQL2000 enterprise. The Cluster is Active/Active and we have a single instance of SQL running on each server. The question I have is would it be possible to add another Instance of SQL on both Boxes, as I understand you can have up to 16 instances on a Single machine but did not know whether this applied in a Clustered environment, especially in a Active/Active clustered environment, and what the implications of this would be. I also understand we will have to up the resources on the Server, if it is possible to add the extra instances; we are looking at a minimum of 4 Gigabytes of RAM per server with Three 2.5 GHz Xeon Processors per server.
It is possible and, like you say, it becomes a resourcing issue. Give the
boxes as much as you can, keeping in mind a worse-case scenario of all instances running on one node. -- Tom --------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA SQL Server MVP Columnist, SQL Server Professional Toronto, ON Canada www.pinnaclepublishing.com [quoted text, click to view] "Mike@Synergy" <Mike@Synergy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message We currently have two W2K Enterprise servers running MSCS and each of thesenews:E3ADAAA6-9B7F-45CE-9D4A-D382936A82F4@microsoft.com... is running MS SQL2000 enterprise. The Cluster is Active/Active and we have a single instance of SQL running on each server. The question I have is would it be possible to add another Instance of SQL on both Boxes, as I understand you can have up to 16 instances on a Single machine but did not know whether this applied in a Clustered environment, especially in a Active/Active clustered environment, and what the implications of this would be. I also understand we will have to up the resources on the Server, if it is possible to add the extra instances; we are looking at a minimum of 4 Gigabytes of RAM per server with Three 2.5 GHz Xeon Processors per server.
Hi
In the case of a cluster, the supported limit is 16 instances per cluster. Regards -------------------------------- Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP Zurich, Switzerland IM: mike@epprecht.net MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/ [quoted text, click to view] "Tom Moreau" <tom@dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message news:O0mQmvx0EHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... > It is possible and, like you say, it becomes a resourcing issue. Give the > boxes as much as you can, keeping in mind a worse-case scenario of all > instances running on one node. > > -- > Tom > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA > SQL Server MVP > Columnist, SQL Server Professional > Toronto, ON Canada > www.pinnaclepublishing.com > > > "Mike@Synergy" <Mike@Synergy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:E3ADAAA6-9B7F-45CE-9D4A-D382936A82F4@microsoft.com... > We currently have two W2K Enterprise servers running MSCS and each of these > is running MS SQL2000 enterprise. > > The Cluster is Active/Active and we have a single instance of SQL running on > each server. > > The question I have is would it be possible to add another Instance of SQL > on both Boxes, as I understand you can have up to 16 instances on a Single > machine but did not know whether this applied in a Clustered environment, > especially in a Active/Active clustered environment, and what the > implications of this would be. > > I also understand we will have to up the resources on the Server, if it is > possible to add the extra instances; we are looking at a minimum of 4 > Gigabytes of RAM per server with Three 2.5 GHz Xeon Processors per server. >
Hi
Those Xeons ate HT so most likely, it will look like 6 processors. There are some know issues under NT4.0 and earlier when using an odd number of processors, but w2k and w2k3, odd number of processors is supported and runs well. Some hardware is not capable of supporting odd number of processors, but that is not a Windows limitation. SQL is very happy with an odd number of processors, as on most big boxes (8 ways), usually SQL is setup to only use 7 processors to give the OS a dedicated processors for Disk and memory management. Regards -------------------------------- Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP Zurich, Switzerland IM: mike@epprecht.net MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/ [quoted text, click to view] "Mike Hodgson" <mwh_junk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:O8EimD30EHA.132@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > In a symmetrical multi processing (SMP) OS such as Windows you need an even > number of processors, so 3 CPUs in each box is not an option - you'll need 2 > or 4 (or more). > > "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@epprecht.net> wrote in message > news:ei2RYA00EHA.2316@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > > Hi > > > > In the case of a cluster, the supported limit is 16 instances per cluster. > > > > Regards > > -------------------------------- > > Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP > > Zurich, Switzerland > > > > IM: mike@epprecht.net > > > > MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp > > > > Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/ > > > > "Tom Moreau" <tom@dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message > > news:O0mQmvx0EHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... > >> It is possible and, like you say, it becomes a resourcing issue. Give > >> the > >> boxes as much as you can, keeping in mind a worse-case scenario of all > >> instances running on one node. > >> > >> -- > >> Tom > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------- > >> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA > >> SQL Server MVP > >> Columnist, SQL Server Professional > >> Toronto, ON Canada > >> www.pinnaclepublishing.com > >> > >> > >> "Mike@Synergy" <Mike@Synergy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > >> news:E3ADAAA6-9B7F-45CE-9D4A-D382936A82F4@microsoft.com... > >> We currently have two W2K Enterprise servers running MSCS and each of > > these > >> is running MS SQL2000 enterprise. > >> > >> The Cluster is Active/Active and we have a single instance of SQL running > > on > >> each server. > >> > >> The question I have is would it be possible to add another Instance of > >> SQL > >> on both Boxes, as I understand you can have up to 16 instances on a > >> Single > >> machine but did not know whether this applied in a Clustered environment, > >> especially in a Active/Active clustered environment, and what the > >> implications of this would be. > >> > >> I also understand we will have to up the resources on the Server, if it > >> is > >> possible to add the extra instances; we are looking at a minimum of 4 > >> Gigabytes of RAM per server with Three 2.5 GHz Xeon Processors per > >> server. > >> > > > > > >
In a symmetrical multi processing (SMP) OS such as Windows you need an even
number of processors, so 3 CPUs in each box is not an option - you'll need 2 or 4 (or more). [quoted text, click to view] "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@epprecht.net> wrote in message news:ei2RYA00EHA.2316@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > Hi > > In the case of a cluster, the supported limit is 16 instances per cluster. > > Regards > -------------------------------- > Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP > Zurich, Switzerland > > IM: mike@epprecht.net > > MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp > > Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/ > > "Tom Moreau" <tom@dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message > news:O0mQmvx0EHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >> It is possible and, like you say, it becomes a resourcing issue. Give >> the >> boxes as much as you can, keeping in mind a worse-case scenario of all >> instances running on one node. >> >> -- >> Tom >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA >> SQL Server MVP >> Columnist, SQL Server Professional >> Toronto, ON Canada >> www.pinnaclepublishing.com >> >> >> "Mike@Synergy" <Mike@Synergy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:E3ADAAA6-9B7F-45CE-9D4A-D382936A82F4@microsoft.com... >> We currently have two W2K Enterprise servers running MSCS and each of > these >> is running MS SQL2000 enterprise. >> >> The Cluster is Active/Active and we have a single instance of SQL running > on >> each server. >> >> The question I have is would it be possible to add another Instance of >> SQL >> on both Boxes, as I understand you can have up to 16 instances on a >> Single >> machine but did not know whether this applied in a Clustered environment, >> especially in a Active/Active clustered environment, and what the >> implications of this would be. >> >> I also understand we will have to up the resources on the Server, if it >> is >> possible to add the extra instances; we are looking at a minimum of 4 >> Gigabytes of RAM per server with Three 2.5 GHz Xeon Processors per >> server. >> > >
[quoted text, click to view] "Mike Hodgson" <mwh_junk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:O8EimD30EHA.132@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > In a symmetrical multi processing (SMP) OS such as Windows you need an even > number of processors, so 3 CPUs in each box is not an option - you'll need 2 > or 4 (or more). Do you have any cite for this? [quoted text, click to view] >
we currently have 2 active / active SQL Clusters, that are running 2
instances each. Be aware that in addition to the added horsepower, you will need additional IP Addresses for the extra instances. Also, your second, and subsequent instances will be named instances, that will need to utilize a different port(1433 will already be in use by the default instance). [quoted text, click to view] "Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote:
> > "Mike Hodgson" <mwh_junk@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:O8EimD30EHA.132@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > > In a symmetrical multi processing (SMP) OS such as Windows you need an > even > > number of processors, so 3 CPUs in each box is not an option - you'll need > 2 > > or 4 (or more). > > Do you have any cite for this? > > > > >
Actually, you can use 1433 sinced you are on a different IP address. Just
to keep things consistant, I don't use the default instance on a cluster. That way all the instances have a consistant appearance on the network. -- Geoff N. Hiten Microsoft SQL Server MVP Senior Database Administrator Careerbuilder.com I support the Professional Association for SQL Server www.sqlpass.org [quoted text, click to view] "Tom Mongold." <Tom Mongold.@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:476DE007-517C-40BE-B76A-8C51C59534DD@microsoft.com... > we currently have 2 active / active SQL Clusters, that are running 2 > instances each. Be aware that in addition to the added horsepower, you will > need additional IP Addresses for the extra instances. Also, your second, and > subsequent instances will be named instances, that will need to utilize a > different port(1433 will already be in use by the default instance). > > "Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote: > > > > > "Mike Hodgson" <mwh_junk@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:O8EimD30EHA.132@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > > > In a symmetrical multi processing (SMP) OS such as Windows you need an > > even > > > number of processors, so 3 CPUs in each box is not an option - you'll need > > 2 > > > or 4 (or more). > > > > Do you have any cite for this? > > > > > > > > > > >
-------------------- | From: "Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@Careerbuilder.com> | References: <E3ADAAA6-9B7F-45CE-9D4A-D382936A82F4@microsoft.com> <O0mQmvx0EHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl> <ei2RYA00EHA.2316@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl> <O8EimD30EHA.132@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl> <xcIpd.13725$1u.11480@twister.nyroc.rr.com> <476DE007-517C-40BE-B76A-8C51C59534DD@microsoft.com> | Subject: Re: Active/Active Clustering - W2K - Adding More Instances | Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 23:55:21 -0500 | Lines: 43 | X-Priority: 3 | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 | Message-ID: <OEt$LRP2EHA.936@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl> | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering | NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.36.129.131 | Path: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGXA03.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP12 .phx.gbl | Xref: cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering:15909 | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering | | Actually, you can use 1433 sinced you are on a different IP address. Just | to keep things consistant, I don't use the default instance on a cluster. | That way all the instances have a consistant appearance on the network. | | -- | Geoff N. Hiten | Microsoft SQL Server MVP | Senior Database Administrator | Careerbuilder.com | | I support the Professional Association for SQL Server | www.sqlpass.org | [quoted text, click to view] | "Tom Mongold." <Tom Mongold.@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message | > we currently have 2 active / active SQL Clusters, that are running 2| news:476DE007-517C-40BE-B76A-8C51C59534DD@microsoft.com... | > instances each. Be aware that in addition to the added horsepower, you | will | > need additional IP Addresses for the extra instances. Also, your second, | and | > subsequent instances will be named instances, that will need to utilize a | > different port(1433 will already be in use by the default instance). | > [quoted text, click to view] | > "Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote: | >| > > [quoted text, click to view] | > > "Mike Hodgson" <mwh_junk@hotmail.com> wrote in message | > > > In a symmetrical multi processing (SMP) OS such as Windows you need | > > news:O8EimD30EHA.132@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... an | > > even | > > > number of processors, so 3 CPUs in each box is not an option - you'll | need | > > 2 | > > > or 4 (or more). | > > | > > Do you have any cite for this? | > > | > > > | > > | > > | > > | | | ##########################################################################33 33 In addition to the resources mentioned you will have to also present the cluster with more shared disk resources on which the SQL Server data files will reside. Regards, Shashank Pawar SQL Server Support Engineer, Microsoft This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |