Re: sql 2005 active/passive cluster options

Agreed. It just doesn't make sense.

--
Tom

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau


"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:110FD458-4A94-412A-B0B4-49719E386853@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
It just seems to me that using NAS with SQL Server in its current state is
not something you want to do if you want HA. In a future version, support
for
NAS may become robust. But until then, I'd stay away from NAS.

Linchi

"Tom Moreau" wrote:

Agreed, though this KB article gives more details:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/304261

--
Tom

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau


"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:450AA224-10A1-4B16-A5A1-D12836D3E87D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I'm curious about your using NAS as part of a HA solution. NAS is not
officially supported with SQL Server.

Linchi

"geekyguy" wrote:

<tagtagboys@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1be6e5e6-f149-42b3-90d0-96fb17d35773@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hope someone can help me out with this or at least point me to the
right direction. We're in the process of implementing an application
that is storing data on a seperate SQL 2005 Standard box. Recently the
SQL server had an hardware fault causing application downtime for
several days. Luckily it wasn't in production - yet. According to the
application support, the only sql fault tolerance that works with
their product is an active/passive sql cluster.

Now I'm a newbie in this area but basically from what I've read in
terms of active/passive failover I need two identical servers (since
will use SQL Std version) + SAN. My company is a small-medium sized so
forking out $$ for that solution might be out of reach.

SO basically my question is, are there any other ways around this e.g.
by using existing SQL 2005 box (close to 2yrs old + Win2k3 Std)? We
also have another SQL 2000 Std box running Windows 2000 Std but don't
think that'll help much. Thanks!


I was at the same x-roads six months ago and went with the
active/passive
cluster. You would do well to follow the recommended procedures for
creating
a cluster. I found these guides very helpful:



http://www.sql-server-performance.com/articles/clustering/cluster_server_2003_p1.aspx


http://www.sql-server-performance.com/articles/clustering/cluster_sql_server_2005_p1.aspx

It will be much easier to set up and diagnose problems if you used
matched
hardware. You will need to use a NAS device for the shared storage
between
the two servers. If you tell us your budget I can perhaps make some
recommendations. The system I built was:

2 x Supermicro 6015V-T 1U servers with 8-gig ram and dual 1.86 GHz xeon
quad-core processors
2 x Intel Pro1000 network cards (for third network/heartbeat)
Netapp Storvault S500 2TB NAS (2U)
16-port Dell gigabit unmanaged switch

If physical space considerations are not a factor, you could use
less-expensive hardware, although the servers were less than $3K apiece.
The
S500 will run about $7500 including a service contract. I battle-tested
their support and found it to be very good <g>. There is a free-standing
StorVault S300 that is less expensive, but not designed for rack
enclosures.

You will need three NICs in each server. The 1U servers had two built
into
the motherboard and I needed a third PCI-X NIC for the heartbeat. I'm
using
a x-over cable to connect the two servers for the heartbeat, but you
would
need ideally an unmanaged hub if you want to have more than two servers
in
the cluster.

Whatever you do, make sure all the hardware is on Microsoft's
compatibility
list or you will not be happy, especially if you're installing 64-bit
versions of OS and SQL. You will need to install Server 2003 Enterprise
if
you contemplate ever expanding the cluster beyond 2 boxes.







.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SSIS as part of scheduled job fails
    ... An SSIS package does not run when you call the SSIS package from a SQL ... Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio ... I ended up contacting Microsoft and opening a support case. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.dts)
  • Re: Cannot setup SQL Mail on SBS 2003
    ... Microsoft CSS Online Newsgroup Support ... Cannot setup SQL Mail on SBS 2003 ... The account you use to start the SQL Server service must be a domain ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: SQL Express Edition Network Deployment Error
    ... I have instructed my colleague to ask for a quotation of MS SQL Standard to solve our problem. ... There is a 25% Discount on SQL Server up to Sept this year. ... Because your mdf is located in a network share and our app accesses the mdf ... Microsoft Online Community Support ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet)
  • Re: Access 2007->SQL Server2005 "connection was forcibly closed",G
    ... I moved every table I was able to move to the SQL ... closed connections - but all of these errors are in the version which used ... the SQL Server 2000 and everything worked ... communication between ODBC (OLEDB and Native Client, ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.connect)
  • RE: SSMSE vs. SSMS
    ... Yes, from the following article in SQL Server 2005 BOL, I think that you ... SSMSE cannot manage Analysis Services, Integration Services, Notification ... SSMSE does not support scheduling administrative tasks by using SQL ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients)
Loading