| Groups | Blog | Home |
sql server clustering : Active/Active/Active/Passive
We are using SQL2000 and considering clustering the
solution. Could someone point us good documentation on clustering. We are particularly interested in Active/Active/Active/Passive Thanks in advance
Hi Thanks a lot for your quick response.
One more question. Can we have Active/Active/Active/Passive talking to single database? [quoted text, click to view] >-----Original Message-----
>We are using SQL2000 and considering clustering the >solution. Could someone point us good documentation on >clustering. We are particularly interested in >Active/Active/Active/Passive > >Thanks in advance >Amar >.
Hi Thanks a lot for your quick response.
One more question. Can we have Active/Active/Active/Passive talking to single database? [quoted text, click to view] >-----Original Message-----
>I assume you mean 4 nodes and 3 SQL instances? I haven't seen much >documentation on clusters with more than two nodes, but it is very much >possible. I have such a system running for about 8 months and it works very >well. Most of the standard clustering stuff applies, just with a few extra >twists. Here is a good overview on SQL failover clustering: > >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/main tain/failclus.mspx > > >-- >Geoff N. Hiten >Microsoft SQL Server MVP >Senior Database Administrator >Careerbuilder.com > >I support the Professional Association for SQL Server >www.sqlpass.org > >"Amar" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >news:2cc1c01c46a68$d62f8cc0$a601280a@phx.gbl... >> We are using SQL2000 and considering clustering the >> solution. Could someone point us good documentation on >> clustering. We are particularly interested in >> Active/Active/Active/Passive >> >> Thanks in advance >> Amar > > >.
I assume you mean 4 nodes and 3 SQL instances? I haven't seen much
documentation on clusters with more than two nodes, but it is very much possible. I have such a system running for about 8 months and it works very well. Most of the standard clustering stuff applies, just with a few extra twists. Here is a good overview on SQL failover clustering: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/failclus.mspx -- 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] "Amar" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:2cc1c01c46a68$d62f8cc0$a601280a@phx.gbl... > We are using SQL2000 and considering clustering the > solution. Could someone point us good documentation on > clustering. We are particularly interested in > Active/Active/Active/Passive > > Thanks in advance > Amar
No. SQL clustering is a failover technology, not a scale-out technology.
Each instance has a unique set of databases and appears on the network as a complete and unique virtual system. Read over the link I included to get a better idea of what SQL clustering really does. It is critical to understand the benefits and limitations of SQL clustering before you try and build a highly available system around that technology. -- 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] "Amar" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:2da4901c46a8d$8f3b07c0$a401280a@phx.gbl... > Hi Thanks a lot for your quick response. > One more question. Can we have > Active/Active/Active/Passive talking to single database? > > >-----Original Message----- > >I assume you mean 4 nodes and 3 SQL instances? I > haven't seen much > >documentation on clusters with more than two nodes, but > it is very much > >possible. I have such a system running for about 8 > months and it works very > >well. Most of the standard clustering stuff applies, > just with a few extra > >twists. Here is a good overview on SQL failover > clustering: > > > >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/main > tain/failclus.mspx > > > > > >-- > >Geoff N. Hiten > >Microsoft SQL Server MVP > >Senior Database Administrator > >Careerbuilder.com > > > >I support the Professional Association for SQL Server > >www.sqlpass.org > > > >"Amar" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in > message > >news:2cc1c01c46a68$d62f8cc0$a601280a@phx.gbl... > >> We are using SQL2000 and considering clustering the > >> solution. Could someone point us good documentation on > >> clustering. We are particularly interested in > >> Active/Active/Active/Passive > >> > >> Thanks in advance > >> Amar > > > > > >. > >
Amar,
It appears that you are interested in -- 3+1 cluster with 3 nodes having instances of SQL Server 2000 and the fourth node is passive. Is that true? -- i.e. multiple instance SQL cluster A multiple-instance SQL cluster can have up to four server nodes (next version of SQL Server ---Yukon will support upto 8 nodes) and supports up to 16 instances (1 default, 15 named or 16 named). Each SQL Server 2000 virtual server requires its own disk resources that cannot be used by other instances. These disk resources are the logical drive names (for example, drive F:\) used by SQL Server on which to store data and log files. Separate physical disk sets are needed to make up the logical drive, unless your disk subsystem supports multiple logical drives on one physical drive set. SQL Server in a clustered environment also behaves differently from a stand-alone named instance in relation to IP ports. During the installation process, a dynamic port that may be something other than 1433 is configured, and that port number is reserved for the instance. In a failover cluster, multiple instances can be configured to share the same port, such as 1433, because the failover cluster listens only to the IP address assigned to the SQL Server virtual server, and is not limited to a 1:1 ratio. However, for security and potentially increased availability, you may want to assign each virtual server to its own unique port of your choice or leave it as it was configured during installation Here are some related links that you may find useful: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability (MS Press) ISBN 0-7356-1920-4 Support WebCast: Windows Clustering: An Overview of Microsoft Clustering Technologies http://support.microsoft.com/?id=325423 Microsoft Whitepaper - SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering http://www.microsoft.com/SQL/techinfo/administration/2000/failovercluster.asp SQL Server 2000 Pricing and Licensing http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/sqlserverlicensing.asp Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability Series http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/deploy/sqlhalp.mspx The Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability Series helps you plan and deploy a highly available data center that uses Microsoft SQL Server 2000 through proper procedures that increase availability, backups help recover from catastrophic disasters, redundant components prevent downtime, and redundant servers minimize downtime. The series consists of: o PLANNING to help you design a data center to achieve the level of availability needed for the business environment. o DEPLOYMENT to help you implement selected server redundancy solutions to minimize unavailability caused by server failures and planned downtime. SQL Server Consolidation on the 32-Bit Platform using a Clustered Environment http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/deploy/32bitconsolidation.mspx Q260758 - INF: Frequently Asked Questions - SQL Server 2000 - Failover Clustering http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=260758 Q243218 INF: Installation Order for SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=243218 NOTE: ====== Make sure that the four node cluster that you use is a complete certified solution. How to locate qualified cluster solutions for Windows http://support.microsoft.com/?id=828262 Cluster Support Policy Microsoft's Cluster support policy is explained in these Q articles: Please read these carefully for the official support policy of Cluster (General): http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;309395 Cluster (SQL): http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;327518 ---- The above links are for Windows 2000 cluster. For a four node cluster you will need either Win2K DataCenter or Win2K3 EE or Win2K3DataCenter. If you are using Win2K3, the following links will help you. Although most of the things are same for SQL 2K Failover cluster on Win2K3, here are some things that are different: 815431 PRB: Installation of a Named Instance of SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server on a Windows 2003-Based Cluster Fails http://support.microssoft.com/?id=815431 SQL Server 2000 Cluster Does Not Install on Windows Server 2003-Based Computers Where Terminal Services Is Installed http://support.microsoft.com/?id=301520 SQL Server 2000 Is Not Supported on Windows Server 2003 Terminal Server Application Server http://support.microsoft.com/?id=327270 PRB: Virtual SQL Server 2000 Installation Fails on Cluster That Has Eight Nodes http://support.microsoft.com/?id=811054 SQL Server 2000 support for mounted volumes http://support.microsoft.com/?id=819546 HTH, Best Regards, Uttam Parui Microsoft Corporation This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit http://www.microsoft.com/security. Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way to do this is to visit the following websites: http://www.microsoft.com/protect http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
No.
"Amar" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:2da4801c46a8d$88b60620$a401280a@phx.gbl... [quoted text, click to view] > Hi Thanks a lot for your quick response. > One more question. Can we have > Active/Active/Active/Passive talking to single database? > >>-----Original Message----- >>We are using SQL2000 and considering clustering the >>solution. Could someone point us good documentation on >>clustering. We are particularly interested in >>Active/Active/Active/Passive >> >>Thanks in advance >>Amar >>. >>
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 |