Consider the following scenario:

I got 2 webservers (2003) using NLB.
I want some kind of common data store (SQL Server).
I need this data store to be fault tolerant.
I don't have any more machines.
I don't have an enterprise licence for windows.

How do I solve this???

Lower your expectations.

Seriously, web servers generally make poor database servers and vice versa.
If you want a common data store, you will need a dedicated machine for SQL.
If you want it to be highly available, you will need a clustered instance, a
highly trained staff, and a class A data center to keep it in. If all you
have are two web servers, you do noy have enough gear for a SQL-centric web
farm.

--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com

I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org

"Johan" <johan (AT) hakksor (DOT) mine.nu> wrote

So what you would suggest, if all I can get are 2 machines, is to have one
machine running only SQL and one running only IIS?

"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA (AT) Careerbuilder (DOT) com> wrote

Or maybe put the money for the second machine into the first.. to make one
more powerful machine with a good RAID system.

I'm still on the planning stage for this operation.

"Johan" <johan (AT) hakksor (DOT) mine.nu> wrote

One, I would separate your web and app servers. I would go with a couple of
lower-end web servers so you have redundancy because you will need to
restart them from time to time. The SQL server needs a decent storage
system and memory more than anything else. You can always add another web
server to deal with growth, but SQL upgrades are usually forklift upgrades.


--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com



"Johan" <johan (AT) hakksor (DOT) mine.nu> wrote

The SQL-server will only be accessed by the webservers for the webapps. I
won't be storing any other data in there.

So you would suggest 2 low-end webservers and 1 a little bit more high-end
SQL?
Money is very limited... so the cheaper, the better.

"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA (AT) Careerbuilder (DOT) com> wrote

2 web and 1 database is probably a good starting config. I understand
limited budget, but you may need to point out to management that they will
be limiting functionality, availability, and performance by limiting the
budget. As long as you have made them aware of the tradeoffs, you have done
your job.

--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com

I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org

"Johan" <johan (AT) hakksor (DOT) mine.nu> wrote

It's my own business so I'm my own manager


"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA (AT) Careerbuilder (DOT) com> wrote

Saying it can't be done is just giving an easy answer, because it can in
fact be done. It isn't an optimal solution, but your objectives can in fact
be accomplished.

1. You can not do clustering for 2 reasons. First, it requires enterprise
licenses. Secondly, it is incompatible with NLB.

You have two solutions within your confines of no enterprise licensing and
only two machines.

Common to both options
1. Install IIS on both machines and configure NLB over them.
2. Implement DFS so that your web files are kept synchronized between the
two machines
3. Review your security, very, very, very, VERY carefully
4. Test your security very, very, very, VERY hard to ensure that it takes
much more effort to hack into your servers than the data would be worth to a
hacker. (It is impossible to make something hack proof, you simply make it
more of an effort to hack than it is worth.)
5. Install SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition on both machines

Option 1 replication:
You take the first machine and make it a publisher and replicate the data to
the second machine. The second machine would be where your distributor
would reside. Make sure that your applications point to server 1 and issue
transactions there. In the event server 1 fails, change the application
pointer to server 2 and continue processing. When server 1 comes back
online, you remove the publication and recreate it in the opposite direction
with server 2 now being the publisher since it has the most up to date
information.

Option 2 log shipping:
You can not use log shipping as it exists in the box. You can use the
simple log shipper from the SQL Server 2000 Resource Kit. The principle
here is the same as with option 1. Server 1 becomes the "master" and server
2 becomes the standby where you restore the tran logs to. In the event of
failure of server 1, you recover the database on server 2, repoint
applications, and continue to process. When server 1 comes back online, you
drop and recreate log shipping but in the opposite direction with server 1
now becoming the standby.

--
Mike
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
"More than just Training"
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
http://www.mssqlserver.com