 | |
Active/Active 2005 Slowness
microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
 
| |||
| |||
|
Active/Active 2005 Slowness -
06-12-2008
, 11:04 AM
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
#10
| |||
| |||
|
|
Anyone have any ideas why a SQL 2005 active/active configuration, would be noticibly slower than if I move one of the active nodes to the other and run on the same node? It doesn't matter which node I put them on, when I run them on 2 different nodes, SLOW, when I move them both to the same node, faster. Each node has the same config, and it doesn't matter which instance is on which node. They are both slow by themselves. Anything from a SQL or configuration standpoint? |
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.