|
|
You're in the
sql server clustering
group:SQL Clustering Options
sql server clustering:
via a NAS, however, DOES NOT support and Active/Active setup via a SAN. Can anyone shed light on this? Any support documentation that would help would be
Hi
SAN is fully supported by MSCS, as long as it is on the HCL. NAS is not. Look at http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304261 Regards Mike [quoted text, click to view] "Mike Hodgson" wrote:
> Can't point you to any doco off the top of my head, but I can say > definitively that SQL 2000 running on an MSCS cluster can indeed talk to > a SAN regardless of how many SQL instances you have on your cluster. > Typically people either have a single instance (which most people refer > to as "active/passive") or 2 instances (which most people refer to as > "active/active") that they try to keep on separate nodes of the > cluster. But you could have up to 16 instances running on a single > cluster node - the number of instances doesn't really matter. > > Basically, all cluster aware SQL server needs is a shared disk to write > data (& log) files to. Whether this is a NAS device or a SAN device is > irrelevant to SQL server - that's managed by MSCS, not SQL. We've been > running several "active/active" SQL clusters on top of MSCS talking to > both HP & EMC SANs (as well as HP & Dell NAS arrays) for over 4 years > now. It all works fine. > > As I said I don't have doco on it but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard > to find cruising around the Microsoft website. > > -- > *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 > > > > TABMCSE wrote: > > > I have read that SQL Server with MSCS supports an Active/Active setup > >via a NAS, however, DOES NOT support and Active/Active setup via a SAN. Can > >anyone shed light on this? Any support documentation that would help would be
Hi
You are still ahead......and all you said is correct. NAS is supported, but with such a restrictive set of rules, it makes NAS not very useful. SAN is still the most correct choice IMHO. Cheers Mike [quoted text, click to view] "Mike Hodgson" wrote:
> Sorry, when I said NAS I meant DAS (direct attached storage) - like Dell > PowerVault S220, Hewlett Packard RS12, etc. My bad - maybe I should > quit while I'm still ahead (or should that be while I'm not too far > behind yet?). > > -- > *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 > > > > Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP) wrote: > > >Hi > > > >SAN is fully supported by MSCS, as long as it is on the HCL. > >NAS is not. Look at > >http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304261 > > > >Regards > >Mike > > > >"Mike Hodgson" wrote: > > > > > > > >>Can't point you to any doco off the top of my head, but I can say > >>definitively that SQL 2000 running on an MSCS cluster can indeed talk to > >>a SAN regardless of how many SQL instances you have on your cluster. > >>Typically people either have a single instance (which most people refer > >>to as "active/passive") or 2 instances (which most people refer to as > >>"active/active") that they try to keep on separate nodes of the > >>cluster. But you could have up to 16 instances running on a single > >>cluster node - the number of instances doesn't really matter. > >> > >>Basically, all cluster aware SQL server needs is a shared disk to write > >>data (& log) files to. Whether this is a NAS device or a SAN device is > >>irrelevant to SQL server - that's managed by MSCS, not SQL. We've been > >>running several "active/active" SQL clusters on top of MSCS talking to > >>both HP & EMC SANs (as well as HP & Dell NAS arrays) for over 4 years > >>now. It all works fine. > >> > >>As I said I don't have doco on it but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard > >>to find cruising around the Microsoft website. > >> > >>-- > >>*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 > >> > >> > >> > >>TABMCSE wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> I have read that SQL Server with MSCS supports an Active/Active setup > >>>via a NAS, however, DOES NOT support and Active/Active setup via a SAN. Can > >>>anyone shed light on this? Any support documentation that would help would be > >>>great! Thank you > >>> > >>>
Thank you both for your help!
[quoted text, click to view] "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
> Hi > > You are still ahead......and all you said is correct. > > NAS is supported, but with such a restrictive set of rules, it makes NAS not > very useful. SAN is still the most correct choice IMHO. > > Cheers > Mike > > "Mike Hodgson" wrote: > > > Sorry, when I said NAS I meant DAS (direct attached storage) - like Dell > > PowerVault S220, Hewlett Packard RS12, etc. My bad - maybe I should > > quit while I'm still ahead (or should that be while I'm not too far > > behind yet?). > > > > -- > > *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 > > > > > > > > Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP) wrote: > > > > >Hi > > > > > >SAN is fully supported by MSCS, as long as it is on the HCL. > > >NAS is not. Look at > > >http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304261 > > > > > >Regards > > >Mike > > > > > >"Mike Hodgson" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>Can't point you to any doco off the top of my head, but I can say > > >>definitively that SQL 2000 running on an MSCS cluster can indeed talk to > > >>a SAN regardless of how many SQL instances you have on your cluster. > > >>Typically people either have a single instance (which most people refer > > >>to as "active/passive") or 2 instances (which most people refer to as > > >>"active/active") that they try to keep on separate nodes of the > > >>cluster. But you could have up to 16 instances running on a single > > >>cluster node - the number of instances doesn't really matter. > > >> > > >>Basically, all cluster aware SQL server needs is a shared disk to write > > >>data (& log) files to. Whether this is a NAS device or a SAN device is > > >>irrelevant to SQL server - that's managed by MSCS, not SQL. We've been > > >>running several "active/active" SQL clusters on top of MSCS talking to > > >>both HP & EMC SANs (as well as HP & Dell NAS arrays) for over 4 years > > >>now. It all works fine. > > >> > > >>As I said I don't have doco on it but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard > > >>to find cruising around the Microsoft website. > > >> > > >>-- > > >>*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 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>TABMCSE wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> I have read that SQL Server with MSCS supports an Active/Active setup > > >>>via a NAS, however, DOES NOT support and Active/Active setup via a SAN. Can > > >>>anyone shed light on this? Any support documentation that would help would be > > >>>great! Thank you > > >>> > > >>>
Can't point you to any doco off the top of my head, but I can say
definitively that SQL 2000 running on an MSCS cluster can indeed talk to a SAN regardless of how many SQL instances you have on your cluster. Typically people either have a single instance (which most people refer to as "active/passive") or 2 instances (which most people refer to as "active/active") that they try to keep on separate nodes of the cluster. But you could have up to 16 instances running on a single cluster node - the number of instances doesn't really matter. Basically, all cluster aware SQL server needs is a shared disk to write data (& log) files to. Whether this is a NAS device or a SAN device is irrelevant to SQL server - that's managed by MSCS, not SQL. We've been running several "active/active" SQL clusters on top of MSCS talking to both HP & EMC SANs (as well as HP & Dell NAS arrays) for over 4 years now. It all works fine. As I said I don't have doco on it but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to find cruising around the Microsoft website. -- *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] TABMCSE wrote:
> I have read that SQL Server with MSCS supports an Active/Active setup >via a NAS, however, DOES NOT support and Active/Active setup via a SAN. Can >anyone shed light on this? Any support documentation that would help would be >great! Thank you. >
Sorry, when I said NAS I meant DAS (direct attached storage) - like Dell
PowerVault S220, Hewlett Packard RS12, etc. My bad - maybe I should quit while I'm still ahead (or should that be while I'm not too far behind yet?). -- *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] Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP) wrote:
>Hi > >SAN is fully supported by MSCS, as long as it is on the HCL. >NAS is not. Look at >http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304261 > >Regards >Mike > >"Mike Hodgson" wrote: > > > >>Can't point you to any doco off the top of my head, but I can say >>definitively that SQL 2000 running on an MSCS cluster can indeed talk to >>a SAN regardless of how many SQL instances you have on your cluster. >>Typically people either have a single instance (which most people refer >>to as "active/passive") or 2 instances (which most people refer to as >>"active/active") that they try to keep on separate nodes of the >>cluster. But you could have up to 16 instances running on a single >>cluster node - the number of instances doesn't really matter. >> >>Basically, all cluster aware SQL server needs is a shared disk to write >>data (& log) files to. Whether this is a NAS device or a SAN device is >>irrelevant to SQL server - that's managed by MSCS, not SQL. We've been >>running several "active/active" SQL clusters on top of MSCS talking to >>both HP & EMC SANs (as well as HP & Dell NAS arrays) for over 4 years >>now. It all works fine. >> >>As I said I don't have doco on it but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard >>to find cruising around the Microsoft website. >> >>-- >>*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 >> >> >> >>TABMCSE wrote: >> >> >> >>> I have read that SQL Server with MSCS supports an Active/Active setup >>>via a NAS, however, DOES NOT support and Active/Active setup via a SAN. Can >>>anyone shed light on this? Any support documentation that would help would be >>>great! Thank you >>>
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 |