 | |
Re: Clustered SQL 2000 and MSDE
microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Clustered SQL 2000 and MSDE -
04-13-2005
, 09:28 AM
|
I'm reviewing a plan put forward by a colleague for a 3-node Windows 2003 cluster hosting a single SQL Server 2000 (for now), and a clustered fileshare. Each role would ideally run on it's own server. The third node would only come into play in the event of failure of either of the first two. The plan is for the third (normally idle) node to have Backup Exec installed on it, not in a cluster-aware configuration, but as a standalone application, which could then be used to backup the other servers. My concern is the MSDE used by Backup Exec as a local data repository. How would this interact with the installation of SQL 2000? Are there any caveats, gotchas, no-no's we should be aware of? |
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
The thirds node WILL be clustered for the purposes of hosting SQL Server and the file share(s), but Backup Exec WON'T be installed into a cluster group, and won't be able to move between the nodes. You say MSDE and SQL 2000 can't exist on the same server? That was my concern. Although BE could use the clustered SQL Server, Veritas recommend using a separate data store for the application to the one(s) you wish to back up. "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" wrote: Problems. The third node would need to be clustered, if you want to use it for failover. As far as I know you should not/can't run MSDE and SQL 2000 on the same machine. BackupExec can use SQL for its DB. Cheers, Rod MVP - Windows Server - Clustering http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog "David Cornes" <David Cornes (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:B011807F-68E7-4D49-AC33-74415178E116 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... I'm reviewing a plan put forward by a colleague for a 3-node Windows 2003 cluster hosting a single SQL Server 2000 (for now), and a clustered fileshare. Each role would ideally run on it's own server. The third node would only come into play in the event of failure of either of the first two. The plan is for the third (normally idle) node to have Backup Exec installed on it, not in a cluster-aware configuration, but as a standalone application, which could then be used to backup the other servers. My concern is the MSDE used by Backup Exec as a local data repository. How would this interact with the installation of SQL 2000? Are there any caveats, gotchas, no-no's we should be aware of? |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
A separate server would be my preferred approach too, but I wanted to get some technical ammo before suggesting it. I'll show this thread to the TA... ;-) Thanks for your help. "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" wrote: Got it, I was not sure if you were really taking 3 node cluster or not. I have configured BE with the database on SQL and it works fine. I would not even try to run MSDE. I actually don't even like running BE on a clustered node. I like to run it from another machine and use a dedicated backup network. The BE network compression is very good. Cheers, Rod MVP - Windows Server - Clustering http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog "David Cornes" <DavidCornes (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6C932AFA-46F6-494C-851D-0400E35F0DB6 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... The thirds node WILL be clustered for the purposes of hosting SQL Server and the file share(s), but Backup Exec WON'T be installed into a cluster group, and won't be able to move between the nodes. You say MSDE and SQL 2000 can't exist on the same server? That was my concern. Although BE could use the clustered SQL Server, Veritas recommend using a separate data store for the application to the one(s) you wish to back up. "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" wrote: Problems. The third node would need to be clustered, if you want to use it for failover. As far as I know you should not/can't run MSDE and SQL 2000 on the same machine. BackupExec can use SQL for its DB. Cheers, Rod MVP - Windows Server - Clustering http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog "David Cornes" <David Cornes (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:B011807F-68E7-4D49-AC33-74415178E116 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... I'm reviewing a plan put forward by a colleague for a 3-node Windows 2003 cluster hosting a single SQL Server 2000 (for now), and a clustered fileshare. Each role would ideally run on it's own server. The third node would only come into play in the event of failure of either of the first two. The plan is for the third (normally idle) node to have Backup Exec installed on it, not in a cluster-aware configuration, but as a standalone application, which could then be used to backup the other servers. My concern is the MSDE used by Backup Exec as a local data repository. How would this interact with the installation of SQL 2000? Are there any caveats, gotchas, no-no's we should be aware of? |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
A separate server would be my preferred approach too, but I wanted to get some technical ammo before suggesting it. I'll show this thread to the TA... ;-) Thanks for your help. "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" wrote: Got it, I was not sure if you were really taking 3 node cluster or not. I have configured BE with the database on SQL and it works fine. I would not even try to run MSDE. I actually don't even like running BE on a clustered node. I like to run it from another machine and use a dedicated backup network. The BE network compression is very good. Cheers, Rod MVP - Windows Server - Clustering http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog "David Cornes" <DavidCornes (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6C932AFA-46F6-494C-851D-0400E35F0DB6 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... The thirds node WILL be clustered for the purposes of hosting SQL Server and the file share(s), but Backup Exec WON'T be installed into a cluster group, and won't be able to move between the nodes. You say MSDE and SQL 2000 can't exist on the same server? That was my concern. Although BE could use the clustered SQL Server, Veritas recommend using a separate data store for the application to the one(s) you wish to back up. "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" wrote: Problems. The third node would need to be clustered, if you want to use it for failover. As far as I know you should not/can't run MSDE and SQL 2000 on the same machine. BackupExec can use SQL for its DB. Cheers, Rod MVP - Windows Server - Clustering http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog "David Cornes" <David Cornes (AT) discussions (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote in message news:B011807F-68E7-4D49-AC33-74415178E116 (AT) microsoft (DOT) com... I'm reviewing a plan put forward by a colleague for a 3-node Windows 2003 cluster hosting a single SQL Server 2000 (for now), and a clustered fileshare. Each role would ideally run on it's own server. The third node would only come into play in the event of failure of either of the first two. The plan is for the third (normally idle) node to have Backup Exec installed on it, not in a cluster-aware configuration, but as a standalone application, which could then be used to backup the other servers. My concern is the MSDE used by Backup Exec as a local data repository. How would this interact with the installation of SQL 2000? Are there any caveats, gotchas, no-no's we should be aware of? |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
I'm reviewing a plan put forward by a colleague for a 3-node Windows 2003 cluster hosting a single SQL Server 2000 (for now), and a clustered fileshare. Each role would ideally run on it's own server. The third node would only come into play in the event of failure of either of the first two. The plan is for the third (normally idle) node to have Backup Exec installed on it, not in a cluster-aware configuration, but as a standalone application, which could then be used to backup the other servers. My concern is the MSDE used by Backup Exec as a local data repository. How would this interact with the installation of SQL 2000? Are there any caveats, gotchas, no-no's we should be aware of? |
|
« 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.