What is the better to use in active/active SQL 2000 cluster ?

1 Default instance and 1 named instance

or 2 Named Instances ?

There are any advantages or disadvantages ?

thanks a lot !
Rubens

Personally, I prefer all named instances. It makes explaining connection
strings to the dev team a much simpler task since they all look alike.

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

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

"Rubens Luque Sanches Junior" <rubensluque (AT) yahoo (DOT) com.br> wrote

Hi

It also makes it "harder" to connect to the wrong instance. You have to know
which instance you are connecting to. Those drop table scripts that people
like to use tend to cause havoc when they run it against the wrong instance.

Regards
--------------------------------
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland

IM: mike (AT) epprecht (DOT) net

MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp

Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/

"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

I agree with Mike & Geoff. All my clustered SQL instances have always
been named instances. Technically there are no disadvantages I can
think of to having both instances being named instances and the
advantages are basically in the category of "less confusing".

--
*mike hodgson* |/ database administrator/ | mallesons stephen jaques
*T* +61 (2) 9296 3668 |* F* +61 (2) 9296 3885 |* M* +61 (408) 675 907
*E* mailto:mike.hodgson (AT) mallesons (DOT) nospam.com |* W* http://www.mallesons.com



Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP) wrote: