Clustering Question...

Say I have a current standalone SQL 2005 node that is SAN attached.
How can I get it clustered by adding a passive secondary node to it ? Can I
do so ? Or do I have to setup an entirely 2 new clustered set of servers and
move the database from the standalone server to it ?
I am trying to avoid buying 2 new servers and move the database across but
would like to just add another node to the existing standalone server and
get it clustered. If this is possible, how can I do it ?
Clusters have built from the ground up. You can't make it a cluster after
the install of SQL. Migrate to a new cluster, built from the ground up, that
is the best option.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"Hassan" <Hassan@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23PKJjfJHHHA.3872@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Say I have a current standalone SQL 2005 node that is SAN attached.
> How can I get it clustered by adding a passive secondary node to it ? Can
> I do so ? Or do I have to setup an entirely 2 new clustered set of servers
> and move the database from the standalone server to it ?
> I am trying to avoid buying 2 new servers and move the database across but
> would like to just add another node to the existing standalone server and
> get it clustered. If this is possible, how can I do it ?
>
>
|||Just to expand on what Rodney said, it is possible to create a cluster from
existing equipment, but it is neither desirable nor supported. The
potential disruption during the install and migration process will likely
cause some unplanned downtime, which defeats the entire purpose of a
cluster. It is best to start from a clean slate and migrate the data into
the new system.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:ODTKVxJHHHA.4804@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Clusters have built from the ground up. You can't make it a cluster after
> the install of SQL. Migrate to a new cluster, built from the ground up,
> that is the best option.
> Cheers,
> Rod
> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
> http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
> http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
> "Hassan" <Hassan@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23PKJjfJHHHA.3872@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
|||What you can do, however, if you are willing to live with a new network
name, is to build a new single-node cluster and install SQL Server on it.
After migrating the databases to this new host, you can then rebuild the
original server and then have it joined to the new cluster as a new cluster
node.
This last bit has very specific steps. Look them up in Books Online or
TechNet. I even think I have a detailed list lying around this new group
somewhere. If I find it, I'll shoot it out to you.
Anyway, this should save you the cost of buying a third server.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23WajdlSHHHA.960@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Just to expand on what Rodney said, it is possible to create a cluster
from[vbcol=seagreen]
> existing equipment, but it is neither desirable nor supported. The
> potential disruption during the install and migration process will likely
> cause some unplanned downtime, which defeats the entire purpose of a
> cluster. It is best to start from a clean slate and migrate the data into
> the new system.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
>
> "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
> message news:ODTKVxJHHHA.4804@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
after[vbcol=seagreen]
Can[vbcol=seagreen]
server
>