| Groups | Blog | Home |
sql server clustering : SQL 2000 on Windows 2000 Cluster - Removal!
Hi All, We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL 2000. My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component entirely from the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. Thanks!
No idea. I've never tried that.
-- Mike http://www.solidqualitylearning.com Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person or entity either by inference or direct reference. [quoted text, click to view] "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... > > Hi All, > > We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL 2000. > My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component entirely > from > the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as > normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. > > If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL > Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. > > Thanks! > > Aaron
We are in the same boat, though I can't see it working!
Cheers, Rod MVP - Windows Server - Clustering http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training [quoted text, click to view] "Michael Hotek" <mike@solidqualitylearning.com> wrote in message news:OCsCMQiJGHA.3144@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > No idea. I've never tried that. > > -- > Mike > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com > Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole > views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person > or entity either by inference or direct reference. > > > "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... >> >> Hi All, >> >> We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL >> 2000. >> My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component entirely >> from >> the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as >> normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. >> >> If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL >> Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Aaron > >
The disks would work, I would worry about SQL. Funny the clustering guys
worries about SQL, the SQL guy worries about clustering... Cheers, Rod MVP - Windows Server - Clustering http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training [quoted text, click to view] "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message news:eGgkR4mJGHA.2912@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... >I doubt that would work. The data disks and virtual IP address are under >the control of the cluster service. Without the cluster, the devices will >stay offline. You can either rebuild SQL as a stand-alone system or leave >it with a single-node cluster. There is no harm in leaving it as a >clustered instance with only one node. > > -- > Geoff N. Hiten > Senior Database Administrator > Microsoft SQL Server MVP > > > > > "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... >> >> Hi All, >> >> We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL >> 2000. >> My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component entirely >> from >> the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as >> normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. >> >> If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL >> Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Aaron > >
I doubt that would work. The data disks and virtual IP address are under
the control of the cluster service. Without the cluster, the devices will stay offline. You can either rebuild SQL as a stand-alone system or leave it with a single-node cluster. There is no harm in leaving it as a clustered instance with only one node. -- Geoff N. Hiten Senior Database Administrator Microsoft SQL Server MVP [quoted text, click to view] "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... > > Hi All, > > We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL 2000. > My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component entirely > from > the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as > normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. > > If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL > Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. > > Thanks! > > Aaron
There wouldn't be any issue there. The single machine has ownership of the
disks right now. If you take out the cluster, those disks are still attached to the machine and still recognized as valid disks. The service accounts would still be setup, the binaries in place, all of the data and log files would be visible. I just don't know about the name or IP address. Along with registry settings and some other internal binary information. Everything else would work or at least still be present. The cleanest way to do this would be to uninstall SQL Server (leave the data files where they are). Break the cluster. Reinstall SQL Server as a standalone instance. Stop the SQL Server service. Copy the .mdf and .ldf files back over the ones dropped during teh install (replacing master, model, msdb). Then start the SQL Server backup. -- Mike http://www.solidqualitylearning.com Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person or entity either by inference or direct reference. [quoted text, click to view] "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message news:eGgkR4mJGHA.2912@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... >I doubt that would work. The data disks and virtual IP address are under >the control of the cluster service. Without the cluster, the devices will >stay offline. You can either rebuild SQL as a stand-alone system or leave >it with a single-node cluster. There is no harm in leaving it as a >clustered instance with only one node. > > -- > Geoff N. Hiten > Senior Database Administrator > Microsoft SQL Server MVP > > > > > "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... >> >> Hi All, >> >> We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL >> 2000. >> My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component entirely >> from >> the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as >> normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. >> >> If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL >> Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Aaron > >
Hmmmmm this is scary stuff.
But I have a feeling it will be a case of 'try it and see!!!' The reason I want to do this is so I can upgrade the SAN underneath it. My main concern in all this is the Quorum disk - which I would like to make a local disk. Thanks Guys. [quoted text, click to view] "Michael Hotek" wrote:
> There wouldn't be any issue there. The single machine has ownership of the > disks right now. If you take out the cluster, those disks are still > attached to the machine and still recognized as valid disks. The service > accounts would still be setup, the binaries in place, all of the data and > log files would be visible. > > I just don't know about the name or IP address. Along with registry > settings and some other internal binary information. Everything else would > work or at least still be present. > > The cleanest way to do this would be to uninstall SQL Server (leave the data > files where they are). Break the cluster. Reinstall SQL Server as a > standalone instance. Stop the SQL Server service. Copy the .mdf and .ldf > files back over the ones dropped during teh install (replacing master, > model, msdb). Then start the SQL Server backup. > > -- > Mike > http://www.solidqualitylearning.com > Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole > views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person > or entity either by inference or direct reference. > > > "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:eGgkR4mJGHA.2912@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > >I doubt that would work. The data disks and virtual IP address are under > >the control of the cluster service. Without the cluster, the devices will > >stay offline. You can either rebuild SQL as a stand-alone system or leave > >it with a single-node cluster. There is no harm in leaving it as a > >clustered instance with only one node. > > > > -- > > Geoff N. Hiten > > Senior Database Administrator > > Microsoft SQL Server MVP > > > > > > > > > > "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > > news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... > >> > >> Hi All, > >> > >> We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL > >> 2000. > >> My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component entirely > >> from > >> the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as > >> normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. > >> > >> If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL > >> Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> Aaron > > > > > >
The signature should not be a problem for Windows. Granted I have not tested
this... You can import a foreign disk to Windows. I have done this in the past successfully. Cheers, Rod MVP - Windows Server - Clustering http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training [quoted text, click to view] "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message news:OKHkV2qJGHA.648@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >I still argue that the disks won't mount without the clustering service. >Clustering mangles the signature on the disk so it appears as a foreign >volume to Windows. The clustering service brings the disks online. >Without the cluster service working, the disks will remain inaccessable to >the Windows OS. They will show up in disk administrator, but they won't >appear as Windows disks. > > -- > Geoff N. Hiten > Senior Database Administrator > Microsoft SQL Server MVP > > > > > "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in > message news:uEH5gTnJGHA.668@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> The disks would work, I would worry about SQL. Funny the clustering guys >> worries about SQL, the SQL guy worries about clustering... >> >> Cheers, >> >> Rod >> >> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering >> http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website >> http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog >> http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training >> >> >> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:eGgkR4mJGHA.2912@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... >>>I doubt that would work. The data disks and virtual IP address are under >>>the control of the cluster service. Without the cluster, the devices >>>will stay offline. You can either rebuild SQL as a stand-alone system or >>>leave it with a single-node cluster. There is no harm in leaving it as a >>>clustered instance with only one node. >>> >>> -- >>> Geoff N. Hiten >>> Senior Database Administrator >>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in >>> message news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... >>>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL >>>> 2000. >>>> My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component >>>> entirely from >>>> the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as >>>> normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. >>>> >>>> If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL >>>> Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Aaron >>> >>> >> >> > >
I still argue that the disks won't mount without the clustering service.
Clustering mangles the signature on the disk so it appears as a foreign volume to Windows. The clustering service brings the disks online. Without the cluster service working, the disks will remain inaccessable to the Windows OS. They will show up in disk administrator, but they won't appear as Windows disks. -- Geoff N. Hiten Senior Database Administrator Microsoft SQL Server MVP "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in message news:uEH5gTnJGHA.668@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... [quoted text, click to view] > The disks would work, I would worry about SQL. Funny the clustering guys > worries about SQL, the SQL guy worries about clustering... > > Cheers, > > Rod > > MVP - Windows Server - Clustering > http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website > http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog > http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training > > > "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:eGgkR4mJGHA.2912@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... >>I doubt that would work. The data disks and virtual IP address are under >>the control of the cluster service. Without the cluster, the devices will >>stay offline. You can either rebuild SQL as a stand-alone system or leave >>it with a single-node cluster. There is no harm in leaving it as a >>clustered instance with only one node. >> >> -- >> Geoff N. Hiten >> Senior Database Administrator >> Microsoft SQL Server MVP >> >> >> >> >> "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL >>> 2000. >>> My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component entirely >>> from >>> the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as >>> normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. >>> >>> If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL >>> Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Aaron >> >> > >
This is not an issue. The disks have to be configured inside Windows and
visible at a Windows level before they can even be added to the cluster. Clustering doesn't write any signatures to the disks that force them to behave differently. If you want to verify this, just highlight a disk resource in Cluster Admin and hit the delete key. The reason that it instantly corrupts the dsk is because all nodes in the cluster immediately grab the disk that is no longer controlled by the cluster service. Clustering controls the disk visibility, because it integrates directly into the OS level and at the disk I/O level controls the disk behavior, not because it writes specialized signatures to the disk. You can in fact stop the cluster service anytime you want to. You can then go to the Service Control applet and start the SQL Server itself manually. If you look in disk administrator, you see exactly what you describe, but you can still read and write anything you want to on the disks from the machine that last had ownership of the disk resources, even with the cluster service offline. If you remove the cluster (unconfigure it), the disks become immediately accessible to any machine that they were configured into when you hooked them up. In this case, it is exactly one machine (a single node cluster). So, when you take clustering out, the disks that were previously controlled by the cluster are now nothing more than regular disks which can be read and written to as much as you want without requiring any reconfig of the disks. This I know, because I have done this many times. The only part I have not done is to remove the cluster when I had a failover cluster instance installed and try to have a fully working SQL Server on the machine once clustering was removed. I very strongly doubt this would work, mainly because of the registry settings related to the instance. -- Mike http://www.solidqualitylearning.com Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person or entity either by inference or direct reference. [quoted text, click to view] "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message news:OKHkV2qJGHA.648@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >I still argue that the disks won't mount without the clustering service. >Clustering mangles the signature on the disk so it appears as a foreign >volume to Windows. The clustering service brings the disks online. >Without the cluster service working, the disks will remain inaccessable to >the Windows OS. They will show up in disk administrator, but they won't >appear as Windows disks. > > -- > Geoff N. Hiten > Senior Database Administrator > Microsoft SQL Server MVP > > > > > "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in > message news:uEH5gTnJGHA.668@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> The disks would work, I would worry about SQL. Funny the clustering guys >> worries about SQL, the SQL guy worries about clustering... >> >> Cheers, >> >> Rod >> >> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering >> http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website >> http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog >> http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training >> >> >> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:eGgkR4mJGHA.2912@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... >>>I doubt that would work. The data disks and virtual IP address are under >>>the control of the cluster service. Without the cluster, the devices >>>will stay offline. You can either rebuild SQL as a stand-alone system or >>>leave it with a single-node cluster. There is no harm in leaving it as a >>>clustered instance with only one node. >>> >>> -- >>> Geoff N. Hiten >>> Senior Database Administrator >>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Aaron Elliott" <AaronElliott@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in >>> message news:1FD7AF10-F30F-4706-9846-8CA76E506E82@microsoft.com... >>>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> We have a single node cluster (formally 2 node) which is running SQL >>>> 2000. >>>> My question is this: wanting to remove the clustering component >>>> entirely from >>>> the picture, can I simply disable the cluster service and start SQL as >>>> normal? We have no need to any clusting on this server any more. >>>> >>>> If I do this, I gather it will still be known on the network as the SQL >>>> Virtual Server name - which is different to the Windows server name. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Aaron >>> >>> >> >> > >
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 |