Re: Quorum Disk or Majority Node?

The solution that interested me was this one :
* Site 1 & Site 2 have hardware replicated storage and are connected via SAN. 
* Site 3 is just connected via network and has only local disks.
* 3 nodes are part of the cluster (1 on each site)
* SQLServer instance can be hosted on node 1 or 2 only
* node 3 is only here for Quorum vote (not eligible for SQLServer instance)

Is that possible without 3rd party software ?
If you can explain me quickly why or why not, i would really appreciate (the 
whitepaper is not very explicit) !

Thanks.

Guillaume.
=====================================
"DAVID A  BERMINGHAM" wrote:

> What if for some reason you wanted to do a MNS and all 3 nodes where
> attached to the same SAN?  Not a good idea, but that would still be a MNS
> and it does not require any third party products.  No application with any
> dynamic data supports MNS without some sort of shared disk, whether iSCSI,
> SCSI, SAN or replicated disk.
> 
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:eM1JRF3JGHA.1028@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > How about:
> >
> > SQL Server does not NATIVELY support MNS clustering.  Third party add-ons
> > may alter this behavior.
> >
> > -- 
> > Geoff N. Hiten
> > Senior Database Administrator
> > Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> >
> >
> >
> > "DAVID A BERMINGHAM" <david.bermingham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
> message
> > news:eKdpQd2JGHA.1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >I would disagree with Geoff's statement that SQL Server does not support
> > > majority node clusters, unless he can point us to the relevant MS
> > > documentation.  I have many customers doing MNS and SQL server
> > > implementations; as long as you understand the requirements and
> > > limitations.
> > >
> > > I believe MNS were introduced to facilitate clustering across remote
> > > locations, hence no shared storage.  Obviously, you have to have a
> > > replacement for that shared storage so that the SQL data is available on
> > > the
> > > passive node in the event of a failure.  What that means is that you
> need
> > > to
> > > do some sort of replication, usually a third party product such as NSI
> > > DoubleTake for replication.
> > >
> > > The other requirement is that a majority of the servers need to be
> > > available
> > > in order for a failover to take place.  So that means you need to have
> at
> > > least 3 nodes in your cluster in order to have a failover, because in a
> > > two
> > > node cluster if one node fails you only have one node left, and 1 of 2
> is
> > > not a majority.  You need at least 2 out of 3 nodes to have a majority.
> > >
> > > In a local cluster where shared storage is available, you will want to
> go
> > > with the traditional quorum based clustering.  If you have no shared
> > > storage, you will want to go with MNS and data replication.
> > >
> > > Alternatively you can ditch MSCS altogether and go with a third party
> > > solution such as LifeKeeper Protection Suite for SQL Server from
> SteelEye
> > > Technology which is a HA and DR solution combined which eliminates the
> > > need
> > > for MSCS, MNS, shared storage and a quorum device.
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > DISCLAIMER: I am a SteelEye Engineer with years of experience
> implementing
> > > HA and DR for WIndows solutions including Exchange and SQL server.
> > >
> > >
> > > "GNocent" <GNocent@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > news:E6E414F7-795A-42A4-9D7E-7AEF21FACEB2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> I found a very interesting article here :
> > >>
> > >
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/techinfo/overview/clustergeo.mspx
> > >>
> > >> The chapter "Three-Site Majority Node Set Quorum in Geographically
> > > Dispersed
> > >> Clusters to Facilitate Automatic Failover" was the exact solution for
> > >> some
> > > of
> > >> my split brain problems, so I wanted to try this solution.
> > >>
> > >> Do you mean that it is a non applicable solution with SQLServer ?
> > >> Why ? (I was thinking that the impact was limited to Quorum+MSCS, not
> > >> clustered resources !)
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for your reply.
> > >>
> > >> Guillaume.
> > >>
> > >> =======================
> > >> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > SQL Server does not support Majority Node Clusters.
> > >> >
> > >> > -- 
> > >> > Geoff N. Hiten
> > >> > Senior Database Administrator
> > >> > Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > "Kevin Antel" <kevina@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > >> > news:um8P7Y5FGHA.208@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> > > New to Windows MCS 2003 is the Majority Node Set option, does
> anyone
> > > have
> > >> > > any experience where Majority Node is better than Quorum or vica
> > > versa?
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Quorum Disk or Majority Node?
    ... SQL Server does not NATIVELY support MNS clustering. ... >> The chapter "Three-Site Majority Node Set Quorum in Geographically ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: 2 node cluster without shared storage
    ... MNS clustering is a new feature for new types ... SQL server requires shared storage. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: Quorum Disk or Majority Node?
    ... but that would still be a MNS ... > SQL Server does not NATIVELY support MNS clustering. ... >> replacement for that shared storage so that the SQL data is available on ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: Indexes Confuses me!!
    ... Kalen Delaney has a column called Inside SQL Server in SQLMag ... and performs a bookmark lookup. ... reading the actual data row costs a single logical page read. ... >>>>>performing a bookmark lookup using clustering keys (i.e., ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.programming)
  • RE: Clustering Set up
    ... Both SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering and SQL Server 2000 Log Shipping are disaster recovery options. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
Loading