Re: Mix O/S Service pack and/or 32 & 64 bit in cluster

I would disagree with your last statement regarding RAM not being an issue with a file server. Using 64-bit versions of the OS to scale out large file servers is a very viable option specifically because of the amount of memory that can be addresses. This allows for a lot of things to happen not the least of which is the number of connections that can be made to the server. Concerns for resource depletion can be more readily addressed in the 64-bit memory space.

There is some content being developed by Microsoft that will discuss scaling out file server on 64-bit versions of the OS.

Thanks.
--
Chuck Timon, Jr.
Microsoft Corporation
Longhorn Readiness Team
This posting is provided 'AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Mike O" <put_the_spam@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:86E335FC-E7D6-4513-A9DF-87154E33A9BC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Daveg" <dguenthners@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1178074463.078146.15190@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
If I want to bring a third node into the cluster, does it have
to be the same version & service pack level as the existing ones?

Answ:
No. You can introduce a new node in the cluster Windows 2003 32 bit
with SP2. (Long term supportability to have all machines at same SP
level)

Thanks for you answer. If/when we bring in a new node with SP2, we'll tranfer the groups to it and update the others to the save version.


We're about ready to upgrade the hardware on the servers, and what I
would
like to do is set up a new server(s), join them to the cluster, then
fail
over the resources to the new servers and remove the ones from the
cluster.

Answ:
This will work fine.


Also, we're starting to move to 64 bit on our server platforms, can
the new nodes be the 64 bit
Windows while the old ones are still at 32 bit?

Answ:
No. You cannot join a 64 bit machine into a 32 bit cluster. Not
supported.

Pretty much what I figured, but thought I would ask. One of our main reasons for 64bit at this point is the ability for more RAM where needed. That's not as much of an issue for a file server, though.

Mike O.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: linux eats up soo much memory
    ... > one acts a file server and the second one acts as a router with IP ... > After just booting both machines up and running the 'top' command ... 450 Mb of Ram just for running a GUI and doing minor stuff. ...
    (linux.redhat.misc)
  • Re: File Server Clustering Question
    ... 2, I do understand you post in multiple newsgroup for widerly suggestions, ... opposed to active/passive for File server ... We are running a Windows 2003 domain and we have two old Windows 2000 ... We have all the hardware for a cluster and a SAN in place already ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.migration)
  • Re: Intermittent Pauses
    ... I reviewed both sets of logs and found no indication of a problem. ... Dell also ... I discovered through perfmon that the file server ... cluster was pausing/freezing from between 1 to 30 seconds randomly. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.clustering)
  • Re: Windows 2008 Cluster
    ... I currently have 7 luns on one file server. ... move these 7 luns to a cluster? ... Do you need a witness disk for each of the 7 luns or one witness ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.clustering)
  • Re: MNS Clustering Vmware
    ... The File Server emulates iSCSI target with Starwind software, ... cluster configuration, plus a file share made on drive X: ... "The disk associated with cluster disk resource 'Disk X:' could not be ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.clustering)
Quantcast