 | |
Active/Active Clustering - Help!
microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Active/Active Clustering - Help! -
10-19-2004
, 01:49 PM
|
Actually it is pretty simple. You install a complete second instance of SQL with all new disk devices, IP addresses, and SQL Instance Name. Each database instance is completely independent. The only issue you have is making sure there is enough resources available, especially physical memory, when you 'stack' the instances on the same host. -- Geoff N. Hiten Microsoft SQL Server MVP Senior Database Administrator Careerbuilder.com I support the Professional Association for SQL Server www.sqlpass.org "Jody Stoll" <jo (AT) mastercare (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message news:e%23x7pauqEHA.3848 (AT) TK2MSFTNGP14 (DOT) phx.gbl... Hi, Could someone please explain to me in an idiots guide kind of way!!! How Active Active clustering works when the underlying Windows 2003 cluster is Active\Passive using mscs with a central SAN. I dont understand how you can run SQL on both nodes when only one node can see the actual SAN resources at anyone time. The scenario I have is I currently have a Windows 2003 Active/Passive cluster with SQL 2000 running on 2 nodes with a SAN. We want to utilise the other node to be able to run a another high end database that we are developing to run along side the first one. However if one of the nodes fail the both Databases should be able to run on one node until the other is running again. For scalability purposes we may at some point wish to add a third node if this is possible. If someone can explain this to me and how to implement it from both Windows point of view and SQL I would be grateful. many thanks |
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hi, Geoff This is only useful if you have different DB devices. How it works if you want to have the same up to date DB device on both instances? Regards, Constantin "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote: Actually it is pretty simple. You install a complete second instance of SQL with all new disk devices, IP addresses, and SQL Instance Name. Each database instance is completely independent. The only issue you have is making sure there is enough resources available, especially physical memory, when you 'stack' the instances on the same host. -- Geoff N. Hiten Microsoft SQL Server MVP Senior Database Administrator Careerbuilder.com I support the Professional Association for SQL Server www.sqlpass.org "Jody Stoll" <jo (AT) mastercare (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message news:e%23x7pauqEHA.3848 (AT) TK2MSFTNGP14 (DOT) phx.gbl... Hi, Could someone please explain to me in an idiots guide kind of way!!! How Active Active clustering works when the underlying Windows 2003 cluster is Active\Passive using mscs with a central SAN. I dont understand how you can run SQL on both nodes when only one node can see the actual SAN resources at anyone time. The scenario I have is I currently have a Windows 2003 Active/Passive cluster with SQL 2000 running on 2 nodes with a SAN. We want to utilise the other node to be able to run a another high end database that we are developing to run along side the first one. However if one of the nodes fail the both Databases should be able to run on one node until the other is running again. For scalability purposes we may at some point wish to add a third node if this is possible. If someone can explain this to me and how to implement it from both Windows point of view and SQL I would be grateful. many thanks |
#13
| |||
| |||
|
|
You can't do that with Microsoft and SQL clustering. SQL Clustering is a failover technology designed as a component of a high-availability solution. It is not a scale-out technology. If you need more processing power, you have to buy a bigger box. -- Geoff N. Hiten Microsoft SQL Server MVP Senior Database Administrator Careerbuilder.com I support the Professional Association for SQL Server www.sqlpass.org "C.Dimitrov" <CDimitrov (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:102B6086-7330-4D85-8791-7307D8CCF964 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... Hi, Geoff This is only useful if you have different DB devices. How it works if you want to have the same up to date DB device on both instances? Regards, Constantin "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote: Actually it is pretty simple. You install a complete second instance of SQL with all new disk devices, IP addresses, and SQL Instance Name. Each database instance is completely independent. The only issue you have is making sure there is enough resources available, especially physical memory, when you 'stack' the instances on the same host. -- Geoff N. Hiten Microsoft SQL Server MVP Senior Database Administrator Careerbuilder.com I support the Professional Association for SQL Server www.sqlpass.org "Jody Stoll" <jo (AT) mastercare (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message news:e%23x7pauqEHA.3848 (AT) TK2MSFTNGP14 (DOT) phx.gbl... Hi, Could someone please explain to me in an idiots guide kind of way!!! How Active Active clustering works when the underlying Windows 2003 cluster is Active\Passive using mscs with a central SAN. I dont understand how you can run SQL on both nodes when only one node can see the actual SAN resources at anyone time. The scenario I have is I currently have a Windows 2003 Active/Passive cluster with SQL 2000 running on 2 nodes with a SAN. We want to utilise the other node to be able to run a another high end database that we are developing to run along side the first one. However if one of the nodes fail the both Databases should be able to run on one node until the other is running again. For scalability purposes we may at some point wish to add a third node if this is possible. If someone can explain this to me and how to implement it from both Windows point of view and SQL I would be grateful. many thanks |
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hi, Geoff This is sad news, after working 10 years with MS technology, now Im forced to go with Oracle clustering migration just because of unavailability to scale-out and a DB device to be seen as one on many nodes. HP servers has some limit on upgrade. New cluster costs much more than another DL380 G3 node. Cheers, C.Dimitrov MCP "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote: You can't do that with Microsoft and SQL clustering. SQL Clustering is a failover technology designed as a component of a high-availability solution. It is not a scale-out technology. If you need more processing power, you have to buy a bigger box. -- Geoff N. Hiten Microsoft SQL Server MVP Senior Database Administrator Careerbuilder.com I support the Professional Association for SQL Server www.sqlpass.org "C.Dimitrov" <CDimitrov (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:102B6086-7330-4D85-8791-7307D8CCF964 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... Hi, Geoff This is only useful if you have different DB devices. How it works if you want to have the same up to date DB device on both instances? Regards, Constantin "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote: Actually it is pretty simple. You install a complete second instance of SQL with all new disk devices, IP addresses, and SQL Instance Name. Each database instance is completely independent. The only issue you have is making sure there is enough resources available, especially physical memory, when you 'stack' the instances on the same host. -- Geoff N. Hiten Microsoft SQL Server MVP Senior Database Administrator Careerbuilder.com I support the Professional Association for SQL Server www.sqlpass.org "Jody Stoll" <jo (AT) mastercare (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message news:e%23x7pauqEHA.3848 (AT) TK2MSFTNGP14 (DOT) phx.gbl... Hi, Could someone please explain to me in an idiots guide kind of way!!! How Active Active clustering works when the underlying Windows 2003 cluster is Active\Passive using mscs with a central SAN. I dont understand how you can run SQL on both nodes when only one node can see the actual SAN resources at anyone time. The scenario I have is I currently have a Windows 2003 Active/Passive cluster with SQL 2000 running on 2 nodes with a SAN. We want to utilise the other node to be able to run a another high end database that we are developing to run along side the first one. However if one of the nodes fail the both Databases should be able to run on one node until the other is running again. For scalability purposes we may at some point wish to add a third node if this is possible. If someone can explain this to me and how to implement it from both Windows point of view and SQL I would be grateful. many thanks |
|
« 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.