| Groups | Blog | Home |
sql server clustering : SQL Failover problem.
I have the default instance owned by server1 and a named instance owner by server 2. If I shutdown server 1 then my default instance fails over to server2. Now server two is running both. (no problem). If I shutdown server 2 then my named instance fails over to server1, but my default instance fails and will only come up when server2 is back online. I have check all dependencies. The physical disks, the SQL IP Address, and the SQL Network Name stay online, just the SQL Server (and stuff dependant on it) fail. This is a new installation (just a few days old) Should I have done two named instances instead of a default and a named? One more bit of info. There is no problem with my Cluster Group or my DTC
Well guys, like magic it now works. I did do a lots of things so I probably
fixed it. Both instances will fail over to the other server and then fail-back. I problem down. Now I have another question. I have been told that I can have my web servers make calls to the MSDTC, and it will pass the data back and forth to the instances of SQL. This way my web servers don't have to know which instance of SQL the database they need is in. Correct ??? If so where can I find information on how to run it this way. Web sites, books, anything will help Thanks [quoted text, click to view] "joe." wrote:
> A few thoughts: > 1. Have you tried a manual failover/move of your default instance without > shutting down the machine? > 2. Anything interesting in the event logs? > 3. Do you have enough memory on server 1 to accomodate the default instance > after the named instance is up and running? > > > joe. > > > "C-Ya" <C-Ya@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:283188D9-B426-4DD2-9ED3-2B3105438F9D@microsoft.com... > >I have multiple (2) instances of sql 2000 running on my windows 2003 > >cluster. > > I have the default instance owned by server1 and a named instance owner by > > server 2. If I shutdown server 1 then my default instance fails over to > > server2. Now server two is running both. (no problem). If I shutdown > > server > > 2 then my named instance fails over to server1, but my default instance > > fails > > and will only come up when server2 is back online. I have check all > > dependencies. The physical disks, the SQL IP Address, and the SQL Network > > Name stay online, just the SQL Server (and stuff dependant on it) fail. > > This > > is a new installation (just a few days old) > > > > Should I have done two named instances instead of a default and a named? > > > > One more bit of info. There is no problem with my Cluster Group or my DTC > > Group failing over or failing back. > >
A few thoughts:
1. Have you tried a manual failover/move of your default instance without shutting down the machine? 2. Anything interesting in the event logs? 3. Do you have enough memory on server 1 to accomodate the default instance after the named instance is up and running? joe. [quoted text, click to view] "C-Ya" <C-Ya@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:283188D9-B426-4DD2-9ED3-2B3105438F9D@microsoft.com... >I have multiple (2) instances of sql 2000 running on my windows 2003 >cluster. > I have the default instance owned by server1 and a named instance owner by > server 2. If I shutdown server 1 then my default instance fails over to > server2. Now server two is running both. (no problem). If I shutdown > server > 2 then my named instance fails over to server1, but my default instance > fails > and will only come up when server2 is back online. I have check all > dependencies. The physical disks, the SQL IP Address, and the SQL Network > Name stay online, just the SQL Server (and stuff dependant on it) fail. > This > is a new installation (just a few days old) > > Should I have done two named instances instead of a default and a named? > > One more bit of info. There is no problem with my Cluster Group or my DTC > Group failing over or failing back.
You can happily run a default instance and a named instance
simultaneously on the same node. It sounds like the binaries for your default instance on server1 may be corrupt. Do all the cluster group resources move over to the other node? If so, does the SQL Server resource try to start up and then fail? If it does then there will be some messages logged in the SQL errorlog (for your default instance) and in the NT event log on server1. Do they give you any clues as to what's going wrong? You can try moving the default instance cluster group to server1, bringing all the dependent resources online (like Disks, IP, Network Name) and then try starting the default instance from the command line (in a DOS shell go to the binaries directory and run "sqlservr.exe -c" perhaps with the -m switch as well so that it's in single user mode; Ctrl-C in the DOS shell will shutdown sqlservr.exe). Does that work? If so, then there's nothing wrong with the binaries on server1. -- *mike hodgson* |/ database administrator/ | mallesons stephen jaques *T* +61 (2) 9296 3668 |* F* +61 (2) 9296 3885 |* M* +61 (408) 675 907 *E* mailto:mike.hodgson@mallesons.nospam.com |* W* http://www.mallesons.com [quoted text, click to view] C-Ya wrote:
>I have multiple (2) instances of sql 2000 running on my windows 2003 cluster. > I have the default instance owned by server1 and a named instance owner by >server 2. If I shutdown server 1 then my default instance fails over to >server2. Now server two is running both. (no problem). If I shutdown server >2 then my named instance fails over to server1, but my default instance fails >and will only come up when server2 is back online. I have check all >dependencies. The physical disks, the SQL IP Address, and the SQL Network >Name stay online, just the SQL Server (and stuff dependant on it) fail. This >is a new installation (just a few days old) > >Should I have done two named instances instead of a default and a named? > >One more bit of info. There is no problem with my Cluster Group or my DTC >Group failing over or failing back. >
Hmmm...that doesn't sound right. :-(
MSDTC (Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator) is responsible for managing atomic transactions across multiple server. SQL can't do this on its own because it only knows about the transaction context of transactions in its own process space. So if you're trying to run a transaction (ie. a single atomic operation) that involves multiple servers you need some external "manager", that is DTC. For a web server to talk to a database it needs to know what SQL server the database lives on. At a minimum, a SQL client (including a connection from a web server) needs the 1) server name, 2) the database name and 3) the connection method (which will be either a flag to say "use a trusted connection with the current security context", otherwise knows as "trusted connection" or a username/password pair for the older style SQL authentication). MSDTC cannot help you figure out where the database lives. But at the same time, you don't need to know which physical node is hosting the instance of SQL. All you need to know is the name of the virtual server (which can run on any configured node in the cluster). The IP address for the virtual server is mapped to the appropriate node (courtesy of MSCS) and all comms to the virtual SQL server are routed to the appropriate physical node. There is an option in SQL 2000 for "adding" a SQL instance to Active Directory, which, as far as I'm aware, publishes the SQL instance in the LDAP directory so that you can "find" the SQL instance by querying AD with LDAP. But I've never bothered with this and haven't heard of anyone who has. It has never sounded like Microsoft's best idea to me and I can't really see any benefit in it. HTH. -- *mike hodgson* |/ database administrator/ | mallesons stephen jaques *T* +61 (2) 9296 3668 |* F* +61 (2) 9296 3885 |* M* +61 (408) 675 907 *E* mailto:mike.hodgson@mallesons.nospam.com |* W* http://www.mallesons.com [quoted text, click to view] C-Ya wrote:
>Well guys, like magic it now works. I did do a lots of things so I probably >fixed it. Both instances will fail over to the other server and then >fail-back. I problem down. > >Now I have another question. I have been told that I can have my web servers >make calls to the MSDTC, and it will pass the data back and forth to the >instances of SQL. This way my web servers don't have to know which instance >of SQL the database they need is in. Correct ??? If so where can I find >information on how to run it this way. Web sites, books, anything will help > >Thanks > >"joe." wrote: > > > >>A few thoughts: >>1. Have you tried a manual failover/move of your default instance without >>shutting down the machine? >>2. Anything interesting in the event logs? >>3. Do you have enough memory on server 1 to accomodate the default instance >>after the named instance is up and running? >> >> >>joe. >> >> >>"C-Ya" <C-Ya@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>news:283188D9-B426-4DD2-9ED3-2B3105438F9D@microsoft.com... >> >> >>>I have multiple (2) instances of sql 2000 running on my windows 2003 >>>cluster. >>>I have the default instance owned by server1 and a named instance owner by >>>server 2. If I shutdown server 1 then my default instance fails over to >>>server2. Now server two is running both. (no problem). If I shutdown >>>server >>>2 then my named instance fails over to server1, but my default instance >>>fails >>>and will only come up when server2 is back online. I have check all >>>dependencies. The physical disks, the SQL IP Address, and the SQL Network >>>Name stay online, just the SQL Server (and stuff dependant on it) fail. >>>This >>>is a new installation (just a few days old) >>> >>>Should I have done two named instances instead of a default and a named? >>> >>>One more bit of info. There is no problem with my Cluster Group or my DTC >>>Group failing over or failing back. >>> >>> >> >>
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 |