Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- From: "KellyVV" <KellyVV@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 08:56:12 -0700
Hello,
We have a standalone Enterprise edition sql 2000 server that we want to
migrate to a cluster and make it a virtual sql server, for high availability
reasons.
We do not want to change the name of the SQL Server, as hundreds of
databases are on this server, and hundreds of applications refer to this SQL
Server name. Because of these requirements, we cannot use the steps in BOL
to upgrade our standalone to a cluster (that includes changing the sql server
name)
We are moving to two new servers (the current server will be retired)
Does anyone know the following two questions....
Is it possible to take the system databases from a standalone version of SQL
Server, and restore them to a clustered SQL Server?
Are there differences in the system databases on a stand alone SQL Server
vs. a clustered virtual SQL Server?
Here is a high level idea of what we would like to do:
- Stop SQL on the standalone server
- Rename the standalone server
- Install sql on the cluster, and give the virtual sql server the orignal
name of my standalone server
- shutdown sql on the cluster
- copy the data and log files for all system and user databases to the
cluster from the standalone server
- start up sql on the cluster
Thanks for your help and time!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- From: Gary Hope
- Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- From: Geoff N. Hiten
- Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- Prev by Date: Re: Clustered SQL 2000 and MSDE
- Next by Date: Re: MS W2k3 Cluster with ORACLE 9
- Previous by thread: Weekly slowdown
- Next by thread: Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading