Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- From: "Huw" <huw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 11:09:25 +0100
Thanks very much...
So if you can't actually block two nodes from failing over to the spare.
How much use is this in practice?
Huw
"John Toner [MVP]" <jtoner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eXCfYBFyFHA.2500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> You can use preferred owners to setup the groups to failover to your SPARE
> node first, and you can use AntiAffinityClassNames property to help
prevent
> groups from coming online on the same node, but you cannot prevent this
from
> happening. If the cluster has no alternatives, it will bring the groups
> online on the same node.
>
> You might want to review the following KB article for more details:
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/296799
>
> Regards,
> John
>
>
>
> "Huw" <huw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:%23uOcWqDxFHA.1148@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I've a question on MSCS and N+1 configuration I was hoping one of you
> could
> > help with...
> >
> > Do you know if it's possible to set up an N+1 configuration in the
> following
> > way.
> >
> > Here is the scenario:
> >
> > We have 3 Servers, NODE1, NODE2 and NODE3
> >
> > We also have a spare node SPARE
> >
> > We then have 3 different resource groups
> >
> > ResourceGroup1 can run on NODE1 and SPARE
> > ResourceGroup2 can run on NODE2 and SPARE
> > ResourceGroup3 can run on NODE3 and SPARE
> >
> > It it possible to configure it so that any one of the Resource Groups
> listed
> > above can failover to the spare, but not more than one resource group on
> the
> > same node at the same time?
> >
> > I couldn't find anything in the Cluster Administrator in 2003, is this
> > functionality available or coming in a future version?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Huw
> >
> >
>
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- From: Russ Kaufmann [MVP]
- Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- From: Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]
- Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- References:
- Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- From: John Toner [MVP]
- Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- Prev by Date: Re: Changing drive letters of Physical disk resource in W2K3 clust
- Next by Date: Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- Previous by thread: Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- Next by thread: Re: N+1 Configuration Clustering Question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|