Re: newbie help: failover server

• Previous message: RP: "Re: newbie help: failover server"
• In reply to: RP: "Re: newbie help: failover server"
• Next in thread: RP: "Re: newbie help: failover server"
• Reply: RP: "Re: newbie help: failover server"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]

Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 16:18:59 -0400

Log shipping is included with Enterprise Edition. You can 'roll your own'
with any edition. Before you ask, yes, it is legal provided all servers
involved are properly licensed. The SQL Server Resource Kit has an example
that will work with standard edition of SQL Server. You will probably need
to tweak it for your specific needs, but it is a good starting point. I
have Enterprise Edition, primarily for the scalability and clustering
features, but I wrote my own log shipping because the included product
didn't meet all of my needs.

-- 
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"RP" <rp@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OLF0ZRBSEHA.1312@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Geoff, after doing some reading it appears that log shipping is only
> available in Enterprise Edition. We are running Standard Edition. What
> options am I left with to have a cold standby server with upto date data
> incase the primary goes down? You had some reservations against
replication
> since all database elements are not replicated. What other options do I
> have, other than restoring the last known good backup on the secondary
> server?
>
> thanks!
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
> news:O4KuwU1QEHA.2132@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > Actually, it is the same rules.  Size and scale may determine which
> solution
> > is best, but the inputs of cost and availability don't change.  The only
> > difference is a business decision of whether the additional uptime is an
> > effective way to spend the company's money.  Of course everyone has
budget
> > limits.  Sometimes major availability enhancements take a while to get
> > approved and implemented.
> >
> > No matter what the decision is, you are fine since management will now
be
> > aware of the risks and has active input in deciding how to mitigate
them.
> > This works the same no matter how big or small  your business.
> >
> > Again, you can work on procedures, documentation, and training even
> without
> > a huge budget.  I guarantee you that will improve system availability
and
> > recoverability.
> >
> > --
> > Geoff N. Hiten
> > Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> > Senior Database Administrator
> > Careerbuilder.com
> >
> > I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> > www.sqlpass.org
> >
> > "RP" <rp@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:eoURYM1QEHA.2468@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > Thanks for the options. I will look into Log Shipping & the SQL
Resource
> > > Kit.
> > >
> > > As far as business decision vs technology decision, easier said than
> done
> > > when working for a company of your size. When it comes to small
> business,
> > a
> > > whole different set of rules come into play.
> > >
> > > thanks again!
> > >
> > > "Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
> > > news:Ot1BHW0QEHA.2704@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > > Without Enterprise Edition and its associated clustering feature,
your
> > > next
> > > > best availability technologies are replication and log shipping.  I
> > > strongly
> > > > discourage replication as an availability option since many database
> > > > elements are not replicated.  Log shipping is included with
Enterprise
> > > > Edition, but you can 'roll your own' without too much difficulty.
The
> > SQL
> > > > Server 2000 Resource Kit includes a simple log shipping example that
> you
> > > can
> > > > adapt for your site.  This will allow you to keep the data fairly
> > current
> > > > with your production server, but will require a fair amount of
manual
> > > > intervention to 'go live'.
> > > >
> > > > My suggestion is to examine your disaster recovery policy now and
> offer
> > > > alternatives to your management based on expected cost and expected
> > system
> > > > availability.  SQL Clustering is one option and log shipping is
> another.
> > > > (You can combine them by log shipping to another site and really be
> > > > prepared.)  Offer them a choice and show what the different levels
of
> > > > spending actually buy in terms of system availability.  You may be
> > > surprised
> > > > what becomes affordable when the choice is presented as a business
> > > decision,
> > > > not a technology decision.
> > > >
> > > > No matter which technology path you choose, documentation and
training
> > > will
> > > > be the keys to meeting your availability targets.  You must have a
> good
> > > plan
> > > > and the personnel to implement it.  Otherwise the technology doesn't
> get
> > > you
> > > > squat.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Geoff N. Hiten
> > > > Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> > > > Senior Database Administrator
> > > > Careerbuilder.com
> > > >
> > > > I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> > > > www.sqlpass.org
> > > >
> > > > "RP" <rp@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:uxFMQTzQEHA.2404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > > > Hi all, Firstly let me apologize if any of my questions sound
> stupid.
> > I
> > > am
> > > > a
> > > > > newbie when it comes to SQL Server. We currently have 1 server
> running
> > > SQL
> > > > > with a couple of databases collectively approaching 2GB. The HDD's
> are
> > > > > configured on a RAID 5 and everything has been running OK. We just
> > > > recently
> > > > > experienced downtime with one of our other mail servers and there
is
> a
> > > > > sudden focus on backup failover servers. Unfortunately we do not
> have
> > > the
> > > > > budget to invest in Windows Advanced Server and SQL Enterprise for
> > > > > clustering etc. It is my understanding that I can have a standby
> cold
> > > fail
> > > > > over server with SQL installed that I can switch on, incase the
> > primary
> > > > goes
> > > > > down. Is that true? If yes, what is the best way to set this up?
Are
> > > there
> > > > > any best practices?
> > > > >
> > > > > In our recent server failure, the server would not even bootup. As
a
> > > > result
> > > > > we could not even get access to the data on the hard drives. We
had
> to
> > > end
> > > > > up biting the bullet by being down the the most part of the day,
> while
> > > the
> > > > > server OS was re-built. Assuming something similar happens on the
> SQL
> > > > > Server, how can I move the latest copy of the database over to the
> > > > failover
> > > > > server? Any suggestions? I know there are some options like having
> an
> > > > > external rackmount storage system, but to my knowledge those are
> > pretty
> > > > > expensive and provided by EMC etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks a bunch!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

• Previous message: RP: "Re: newbie help: failover server"
• In reply to: RP: "Re: newbie help: failover server"
• Next in thread: RP: "Re: newbie help: failover server"
• Reply: RP: "Re: newbie help: failover server"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]