Is there any way to upgrade a 32 bit SQL Server 2005 cluster (Windows server
2003) to 64 bit SQL Server 2005 on Windows Server 2003 short of rebuilding
everything? My current plan is to create an entirely new cluster and then
migrate all the data over, and make DNS aliases for the virtual node names
so everyone doesn't have to change their ODBC connections, app config, etc.

Can anyone point me to any links that may be helpful?

Thanks

Matt

with a cluster everything needs to match so you cant have a mix of 32 and
64.

it sounds like you are on the right track. depending on what is allowed for
downtime (and a few other factors) you could just change the virtual names,
i've done this before where i'll have my current virtual name changed to
'name-old' and make the new one 'name' and provided your network is healthy
it should be fine.

Justin

"mattd1" <someone (AT) microsoft (DOT) com> wrote

"mattd1" <someone (AT) microsoft (DOT) com> wrote

No, you can't upgrade, you have to build a new environment and then copy and
mount your databases in the new environment.

Also, please don't go to WIndows 2003 64-bit. Windows Server 2008 and 2008
R2 are both rock solid platforms that have significant improvements in
clustering. They are much better choices.


--
Russ Kaufmann
MVP, MCT, MCITP x7, MCTS x9, MCSE x4, CTT+
ClusterHelp.com, a Microsoft Gold Certified Partner

Email:russ (AT) clusterhelp (DOT) com
http://www.clusterhelp.com
Blog: http://msmvps.com/clusterhelp

Thanks. I didn't realize you could just go in and change the virtual name.
The downtime allowed is zero, of course, but there will be some downtime
obviously. I'll need to look at changing the virtual names. That helps.

Matt

"Justin Rich" <jrich523 (AT) yahoo (DOT) spam> wrote

so the best idea would be to build up the new cluster and prep it then when
the time comes backup and restore the db and rename the virtual nodes (I've
only done the SQL virtual name so I'm not 100% sure you can do the windows
virtual name)

the other thing you could try if the backup/restore takes a long time and,
depending on your comfort and the companies desire for no downtime is you
could do a mirror... off hand I want to say with a mirror (mirror, log
shipping, replication, not sure what's best off hand) you don't need exactly
the same system (keep patch levels the same, but 32 vs. 64, pretty sure
doesn't matter) and then when the time comes you break the
mirror/replication and change the names. probably about a total of 10 min or
less of down time. I guess I would only pursue this method if the db is
large and the backup/restore takes a lot of time... just another thought
though

Justin

"mattd1" <someone (AT) microsoft (DOT) com> wrote