Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's
- From: "KellyVV" <KellyVV@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 09:27:02 -0700
Thank you for your comments and advice. I don't think the network name
presented by the cluster should not be an issue, as long as the name of the
virtual SQL Server instance is the same as before. The application users
rely on the SQL Server name, not the cluster or server name.
My main question is, are there any differences in the system databases on
standalone servers vs. system databases of clustered virtual sql servers?
I am having trouble finding the answer to that question. If someone can
verify that for me I would very much appreciate it. :)
Thank you!
Kelly
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> I wouldn't try and copy the system databases from one server to another,
> much less from a non-clustered instance to a clustered instance. You are
> likely much better off aliasing the old name to the new name using a DNS
> record or a client-side alias. Even if you do manage to copy the system
> databases, the network name presented to the outside world by the Cluster
> won't change so you will not solve your initial problem.
>
> Geoff N.Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "KellyVV" <KellyVV@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:6BC09EC5-ACC9-4493-8E89-43684AC9A82E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > 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: Geoff N. Hiten
- Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's
- References:
- Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- From: KellyVV
- Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- From: Geoff N. Hiten
- Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- Prev by Date: Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- Next by Date: Registry difference when adding a node
- Previous by thread: Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's?
- Next by thread: Re: Differences in clustered system db's vs standalone system db's
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
