Clustering with 2 active nodes and 1 passive node

Normally, clustering is setup as a 1-to-1 relationship between active and
passive nodes, at least that is my understanding. We have a situation where
we are being asked to setup a 2 active node, 1 passive node environment.
Here's the question - if one of the active nodes fails, it fails over to the
passive node. Now what happens if the 2nd active node fails? Will the other
active node (originally the passive node) handle the failover or will it try
to failover to the first active node that failed or will the whole thing just
grind to a screeching halt? I know we can setup a 2 active/ 2passive node
setup, but we wanted to research the 2-to-1 possibility as well.
Thanks!
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
Hi
You don't need a 1:1 relationship between nodes.
And forget the terms active / passive, it is totally out of date and does
not describe SQL Server 2000/2005 clustering.
You have an instance of SQL Server running on an node.
If you have 2 nodes, it could run on any of those nodes at any one time. If
you had 3 nodes, it could run on any of those nodes, at any one time.
If you have 2 nodes, one sits around waiting for a failover. If you have 3
nodes, 2 sit around waiting for a failover.
If you have more than one SQL Server instance running on the cluster, then
the instances can run on any of the nodes.
The instances could be all running on the same node, or dispersed over the
various nodes.
Quite often, people run with 3 nodes and 2 instances or 4 nodes with 3
instances. There is nothing stopping you running 3 instances on 3 nodes, 4
instances on 4 nodes, or any combination of up to 16 instances over 4 nodes.
You just need to make sure that you have enough resources, that in worst
case, one node could run all instances.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Michael G via droptable.com" <forum@.droptable.com> wrote in message
news:541CE6C54F90F@.droptable.com...
> Normally, clustering is setup as a 1-to-1 relationship between active and
> passive nodes, at least that is my understanding. We have a situation
> where
> we are being asked to setup a 2 active node, 1 passive node environment.
> Here's the question - if one of the active nodes fails, it fails over to
> the
> passive node. Now what happens if the 2nd active node fails? Will the
> other
> active node (originally the passive node) handle the failover or will it
> try
> to failover to the first active node that failed or will the whole thing
> just
> grind to a screeching halt? I know we can setup a 2 active/ 2passive node
> setup, but we wanted to research the 2-to-1 possibility as well.
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
|||Very helpful. Question: So now, even with RAID 10, the single point of
failure becomes the shared drive array? How does one go about creating a
failover for this?
Respectfully,
Michael Wiederhold
michael@.auctionarms.com
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:%230j6BCZtFHA.3236@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> You don't need a 1:1 relationship between nodes.
> And forget the terms active / passive, it is totally out of date and does
> not describe SQL Server 2000/2005 clustering.
> You have an instance of SQL Server running on an node.
> If you have 2 nodes, it could run on any of those nodes at any one time.
> If you had 3 nodes, it could run on any of those nodes, at any one time.
> If you have 2 nodes, one sits around waiting for a failover. If you have 3
> nodes, 2 sit around waiting for a failover.
> If you have more than one SQL Server instance running on the cluster, then
> the instances can run on any of the nodes.
> The instances could be all running on the same node, or dispersed over the
> various nodes.
> Quite often, people run with 3 nodes and 2 instances or 4 nodes with 3
> instances. There is nothing stopping you running 3 instances on 3 nodes, 4
> instances on 4 nodes, or any combination of up to 16 instances over 4
> nodes. You just need to make sure that you have enough resources, that in
> worst case, one node could run all instances.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Michael G via droptable.com" <forum@.droptable.com> wrote in message
> news:541CE6C54F90F@.droptable.com...
>
|||Hi
Most high end SAN's have a block level copy mechanism so that you can
"mirror" that data to another SAN, preferably at another location.
EMC has SRDF that can run synchronous or asynchronous over fast WAN links.
Tape backups must never be forgotten either.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"michael wiederhold" <michael@.auctionarms.com> wrote in message
news:%23RhSzuztFHA.3068@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Very helpful. Question: So now, even with RAID 10, the single point of
> failure becomes the shared drive array? How does one go about creating a
> failover for this?
> Respectfully,
> Michael Wiederhold
> michael@.auctionarms.com
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:%230j6BCZtFHA.3236@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks. Really do appreciate your participation in this newsgroup.
Respectfully,
Michael Wiederhold
michael@.auctionarms.com
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:ONHGyz8tFHA.2540@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> Most high end SAN's have a block level copy mechanism so that you can
> "mirror" that data to another SAN, preferably at another location.
> EMC has SRDF that can run synchronous or asynchronous over fast WAN links.
> Tape backups must never be forgotten either.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "michael wiederhold" <michael@.auctionarms.com> wrote in message
> news:%23RhSzuztFHA.3068@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>

Clustering SQL Servers in a Workgroup

I have setup a couple of SQL Server 2 node clusters in the past and was
always in a domain environment. I now have to setup a 2 node cluster in a
none domain workgroup environment if anyone has any tips I would appreciate
the advice.
Thanks,
Andrew
It's not supported. You need a domain.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"chabotwvu" <chabotwvu@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C64FA1A9-86BC-4438-9A66-809EF466883B@.microsoft.com...
I have setup a couple of SQL Server 2 node clusters in the past and was
always in a domain environment. I now have to setup a 2 node cluster in a
none domain workgroup environment if anyone has any tips I would appreciate
the advice.
Thanks,
Andrew

Clustering Service not starting right away on One Node

I just set up a cluster attached to a SAN. I have had it where the cluster
service on one of the nodes doesn't start up right away. I have checked the
services to make sure that it is set to automatic which it is. Both nodes
are current with the latest patches and security updates. I'm a little
clueless as to why this is happening. Here is the real weird part after 1
minute the cluster service starts on the node that is giving me troubles.
The other node is perfectly fine.
Hi
If you do a fail-over using cluster admin, are there any resources (that SQL
server depends on) take a long to come online?
I have seen similar issues when the devices take long to come online due to
high SAN activity.
Does the SQL Server resource come online, but take a long time until it has
done it's recovery steps?
This can occur when the other node was de-porting it's devices and still had
IO pending. This results in not all pages being fluished to SAN, so SQL
Server has to do more recovery on the database start-up.
The best guage of how quickly a resource comes online is to look at cluster
admin during the failover.
Regards
Mike
Regards
Mike
"Thomas" wrote:

> I just set up a cluster attached to a SAN. I have had it where the cluster
> service on one of the nodes doesn't start up right away. I have checked the
> services to make sure that it is set to automatic which it is. Both nodes
> are current with the latest patches and security updates. I'm a little
> clueless as to why this is happening. Here is the real weird part after 1
> minute the cluster service starts on the node that is giving me troubles.
> The other node is perfectly fine.
|||We haven't installed SQL server yet. I should've posted that first. But I
know from passed installs that SQL does take some time to come online. The
SAN doesn't have much activity on it right now
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi
> If you do a fail-over using cluster admin, are there any resources (that SQL
> server depends on) take a long to come online?
> I have seen similar issues when the devices take long to come online due to
> high SAN activity.
> Does the SQL Server resource come online, but take a long time until it has
> done it's recovery steps?
> This can occur when the other node was de-porting it's devices and still had
> IO pending. This results in not all pages being fluished to SAN, so SQL
> Server has to do more recovery on the database start-up.
> The best guage of how quickly a resource comes online is to look at cluster
> admin during the failover.
> Regards
> Mike
> Regards
> Mike
> "Thomas" wrote:
|||Hi
Have a look in your event logs and check the time differences between when
Node A shuts down and Node B notices it and starts up. There will be at least
15 event messages during this process. Post the information here so that I
can compare it to our big clusters.
Regards
Mike
"Thomas" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> We haven't installed SQL server yet. I should've posted that first. But I
> know from passed installs that SQL does take some time to come online. The
> SAN doesn't have much activity on it right now
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
|||That may be somewhat normal on a simultaneous startup. The first node grabs
the quorum device and owns the cluster but isn't talking on the network yet.
The second node tries to get the device but times out. Eventually the
service comes online and talks to the other node and agrees on who is in
charge. This is especially prevalent on SCSI-based clusters.
Check the System and Application event logs on both systems to see if there
are any unusual startup errors. Also, check what happens when the second
node is rebooted. If the cluster service does come online quickly, it is
just a device contention issue. I try and avoid powering up more than one
cluster node at a time.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Thomas" <Thomas@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AF61883D-AE50-4F3F-AD3F-3F07834A2B78@.microsoft.com...
> I just set up a cluster attached to a SAN. I have had it where the
cluster
> service on one of the nodes doesn't start up right away. I have checked
the
> services to make sure that it is set to automatic which it is. Both nodes
> are current with the latest patches and security updates. I'm a little
> clueless as to why this is happening. Here is the real weird part after 1
> minute the cluster service starts on the node that is giving me troubles.
> The other node is perfectly fine.
|||Node 2 which I haven't seen the problem with having ownership of the cluster.
When I reboot node 1 is when I see the problem of it taking 1 mintue to
start the cluster service.
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> That may be somewhat normal on a simultaneous startup. The first node grabs
> the quorum device and owns the cluster but isn't talking on the network yet.
> The second node tries to get the device but times out. Eventually the
> service comes online and talks to the other node and agrees on who is in
> charge. This is especially prevalent on SCSI-based clusters.
> Check the System and Application event logs on both systems to see if there
> are any unusual startup errors. Also, check what happens when the second
> node is rebooted. If the cluster service does come online quickly, it is
> just a device contention issue. I try and avoid powering up more than one
> cluster node at a time.
>
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Thomas" <Thomas@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:AF61883D-AE50-4F3F-AD3F-3F07834A2B78@.microsoft.com...
> cluster
> the
>
>
|||Node order is arbitrary in a cluster. We could use Node X and Node Y
instead of Node 1 and Node 2.
Try manually stopping and starting the cluster service on Node 1. If it
restarts quickly, then the problem likely is one of the services that the
cluster service depends on. Time service is a usual suspect for that, but
you will have to check the entire list. Again, the Application and System
event logs are your friends here.
Now is the time to deal with this issue, not after you load SQL and get this
baby into production.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Thomas" <Thomas@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:29B2402A-537B-4DCE-A137-FA200DD28872@.microsoft.com...
> Node 2 which I haven't seen the problem with having ownership of the
cluster.[vbcol=seagreen]
> When I reboot node 1 is when I see the problem of it taking 1 mintue to
> start the cluster service.
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
grabs[vbcol=seagreen]
yet.[vbcol=seagreen]
there[vbcol=seagreen]
second[vbcol=seagreen]
is[vbcol=seagreen]
one[vbcol=seagreen]
checked[vbcol=seagreen]
nodes[vbcol=seagreen]
little[vbcol=seagreen]
after 1[vbcol=seagreen]
troubles.[vbcol=seagreen]

Clustering Reporting Services

Hello,
I'm running a two node cluster, Windows 2003 R2 and SQL 2005. Does anyone
have a white paper or documentation that tells me how to install Reporting
Services as a clustered service? I've never set up a web farm or anyting of
that nature, so any information regarding this would be greatly apprecaited.
Thank you
Alex AndersonI have the same issue here, I'll start installing an active-active cluster
this week and I need to install reporting services on the cluster.
What is the best way to do this.
I asume that reporting services is not cluster aware.
Regards
"Alex Anderson" wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm running a two node cluster, Windows 2003 R2 and SQL 2005. Does anyone
> have a white paper or documentation that tells me how to install Reporting
> Services as a clustered service? I've never set up a web farm or anyting of
> that nature, so any information regarding this would be greatly apprecaited.
> Thank you
> Alex Anderson
>|||Zekske,
What I found out was, depending what version of SQL 2005 you have, I have
standard 2005 which even though SQL is clusterable, reporting services is
not. You will need Enterprise SQL 2005 to be able to cluster reporting
services. I'm just going to run a non-clusterable version of reporting
services.
"Zekske" wrote:
> I have the same issue here, I'll start installing an active-active cluster
> this week and I need to install reporting services on the cluster.
> What is the best way to do this.
> I asume that reporting services is not cluster aware.
> Regards
> "Alex Anderson" wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm running a two node cluster, Windows 2003 R2 and SQL 2005. Does anyone
> > have a white paper or documentation that tells me how to install Reporting
> > Services as a clustered service? I've never set up a web farm or anyting of
> > that nature, so any information regarding this would be greatly apprecaited.
> >
> > Thank you
> > Alex Anderson
> >|||OK thanks.
We're installing Enterprise Edition so we'll try the clustering...
Regards
"Alex Anderson" wrote:
> Zekske,
> What I found out was, depending what version of SQL 2005 you have, I have
> standard 2005 which even though SQL is clusterable, reporting services is
> not. You will need Enterprise SQL 2005 to be able to cluster reporting
> services. I'm just going to run a non-clusterable version of reporting
> services.
> "Zekske" wrote:
> > I have the same issue here, I'll start installing an active-active cluster
> > this week and I need to install reporting services on the cluster.
> > What is the best way to do this.
> > I asume that reporting services is not cluster aware.
> > Regards
> >
> > "Alex Anderson" wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I'm running a two node cluster, Windows 2003 R2 and SQL 2005. Does anyone
> > > have a white paper or documentation that tells me how to install Reporting
> > > Services as a clustered service? I've never set up a web farm or anyting of
> > > that nature, so any information regarding this would be greatly apprecaited.
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > > Alex Anderson
> > >

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
>

Clustering Nodes

Can I create a 2-node cluster using servers with different CPU configs? I have a dual CPU in one node and a quad cpu in another that I want to be able to cluster SQL 2000.
TIA,
Ken
Possible, Yes.
Recommended, No.
FYI, you can't just pick two machines at random and create a cluster.
First, the machines must be on the Cluster HCL (Hardware Compatability
List). Second, they must be installed and configured by a certified cluster
vendor. Otherwise, you may not be able to obtain support for your cluster.
(Or at least the support stops at 'You need to be on a certified cluster'.)
If all you are interested in is a cluster for testing and training, then go
right ahead and grab whatever is lying around. If you want a cluster to be
the centerpiece of a High-Availability database solution, then you need to
go with a certified install.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Ken Krause" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D0EA9DE7-3445-45A7-8F4A-EB397C94CBFE@.microsoft.com...
> Can I create a 2-node cluster using servers with different CPU configs? I
have a dual CPU in one node and a quad cpu in another that I want to be able
to cluster SQL 2000.
> TIA,
> Ken
|||Thanks for the response. I have a clustered pair of nodes with all hardware on the HCL and have been running without any clustering problems whatsoever. However, the database at the center of this web-based app is running into cpu bettlenecks which causes
extremely poor performance. This has been building for a few months now. I want to go to a quad cpu to eliminate this bottleneck, but can only get the funds for one server at a time. I need the performance right now, but want to keep the clustering for a
vailability.
|||Here's an article which describes the tolerable difference between your
cluster nodes and still maintain support for your cluster:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;814607
It'll work and it's supported, though certainly not recommended.
Regards,
John
"kmkrause2" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:055EEAD5-EB16-438B-B9AC-045F2EC9415C@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks for the response. I have a clustered pair of nodes with all
hardware on the HCL and have been running without any clustering problems
whatsoever. However, the database at the center of this web-based app is
running into cpu bettlenecks which causes extremely poor performance. This
has been building for a few months now. I want to go to a quad cpu to
eliminate this bottleneck, but can only get the funds for one server at a
time. I need the performance right now, but want to keep the clustering for
availability.
|||Thanks for the link, John. Now if only the server would get here. It seems DHL has lost it. It shipped from Vegas and hasn't been documented since it left there 2 days ago. Probably has been stolen, or maybe I've been watching too much Soprano's.

clustering Exchange and SQL server using one SAN drive

I'm planning to use Exchange Server 2003 and SQL server 2000 in a clustered
solution (windows 2003) with 2 nodes.
One node should contain the active Exchange resources. The other node should
contain the active SQL server resources. If one node failes the other node
should run all Exchange AND SQL server resources.
I am using a SAN (HP MSA500) solution for data storage. In our cluster
server this is assigned as the physical disk resource "Disk D:". This disk
resource was added to the default group "Cluster group".
I need to store my data from both Exchange Server and SQL server on this
"Disk D:". However, this disk resource is joined to only one node. The
D-drive is only available on the node which is active for the "Cluster
group".
Question: is it possible to use the D-drive for both nodes at the same time?
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks in advance for your answer.
Arnoud Muggen
You have a hardware configuration issue. Microsoft clustering uses the
shared nothing model. You simply can't have the D Drive on both nodes at the
same time.
Start all over. Carve up your MAS500 into volumes. Clustering will use these
volumes as drives.
Next issue, its really not a good idea to run Active(SQL)/Active(Exchange)
on a two node cluster. During a failure the remaining system is going to
take a pretty big performance hit. Let alone having the SQL & Exchange bits
on the same machine at the same time. Yuck and not a best practice,
especially if you care about performance.
I suggest you get Virtual Server 2005 or VMWare and create a test cluster to
learn more about configurations. Knowledge is very handy with clusters.
I also hear that www.clusterhelp.com has several custom detailed training
classes coming up in NYC & Denver. You may want to looking to them for help

Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
"Arnoud Muggen" <webmaster_n_o_s_p_a_m_@.act-one.net> wrote in message
news:eZkgekp6FHA.1724@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'm planning to use Exchange Server 2003 and SQL server 2000 in a
> clustered
> solution (windows 2003) with 2 nodes.
> One node should contain the active Exchange resources. The other node
> should
> contain the active SQL server resources. If one node failes the other node
> should run all Exchange AND SQL server resources.
> I am using a SAN (HP MSA500) solution for data storage. In our cluster
> server this is assigned as the physical disk resource "Disk D:". This disk
> resource was added to the default group "Cluster group".
> I need to store my data from both Exchange Server and SQL server on this
> "Disk D:". However, this disk resource is joined to only one node. The
> D-drive is only available on the node which is active for the "Cluster
> group".
> Question: is it possible to use the D-drive for both nodes at the same
> time?
> What am I doing wrong?
> Thanks in advance for your answer.
> Arnoud Muggen
>
|||Everything clear, thanks. I'll start the installation all over again.
Thanks for your help
Arnoud
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:%23as4D8q6FHA.3120@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> You have a hardware configuration issue. Microsoft clustering uses the
> shared nothing model. You simply can't have the D Drive on both nodes at
the
> same time.
> Start all over. Carve up your MAS500 into volumes. Clustering will use
these
> volumes as drives.
> Next issue, its really not a good idea to run Active(SQL)/Active(Exchange)
> on a two node cluster. During a failure the remaining system is going to
> take a pretty big performance hit. Let alone having the SQL & Exchange
bits
> on the same machine at the same time. Yuck and not a best practice,
> especially if you care about performance.
> I suggest you get Virtual Server 2005 or VMWare and create a test cluster
to
> learn more about configurations. Knowledge is very handy with clusters.
> I also hear that www.clusterhelp.com has several custom detailed training
> classes coming up in NYC & Denver. You may want to looking to them for
help[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Cheers,
> Rod
> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
> http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
> http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
> http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
>
> "Arnoud Muggen" <webmaster_n_o_s_p_a_m_@.act-one.net> wrote in message
> news:eZkgekp6FHA.1724@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
node[vbcol=seagreen]
disk
>

Clustering and Transactions

Hi,
When the primary server fails and the secondary starts to take over the job,
what will happen to the transactions opened on the primary node prior to
failure?
Thanks,
Leila
They all get rolled back and every connection is severed. Your client code
should re-try.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com
"Leila" <leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:OXWJoSdwEHA.3336@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
Hi,
When the primary server fails and the secondary starts to take over the job,
what will happen to the transactions opened on the primary node prior to
failure?
Thanks,
Leila
|||"Leila" <leilas@.hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:OXWJoSdwEHA.3336@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> When the primary server fails and the secondary starts to take over the
job,
> what will happen to the transactions opened on the primary node prior to
> failure?
You need to treat it just like one server was shut down and the other
started up.
Transactions are rolled back (or in a few cases forward) as appropriate.

> Thanks,
> Leila
>

clustering - cannot ping sql virtual name

I have a two node cluster. Node 1 has the SQL instance running on it and
Node 2 has the cluster group and msdtc running on it. I can ping the SQL
virtual name and access SQL successfully. If I move the SQL group to Node 2,
then I can no longer ping the virtual name or access the database. Any ideas?
When a cluster moves from one node to another the uplink (probably a router)
needs to react appropriately. The uplink needs to update it's ARP table
(http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/A/ARP.html). The new controlling node will
also send out a gratuitous ARP so that whoever is listening will update
themselves. It appears that in your case the gratuitous ARP is falling on
deaf ears. Talk to your networking group and possibly sniff the wire during
a move.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
http://msmvps.com/clustering/archive.../20/58233.aspx NYC Clustering
class
"jay d" <jayd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:52FAFC71-4801-457B-9FFF-E5742ACB3032@.microsoft.com...
>I have a two node cluster. Node 1 has the SQL instance running on it and
> Node 2 has the cluster group and msdtc running on it. I can ping the SQL
> virtual name and access SQL successfully. If I move the SQL group to Node
> 2,
> then I can no longer ping the virtual name or access the database. Any
> ideas?
>

clustering - adding a third node

Hi All,
I have a two node cluster, and need to add a third node, can anyone please
send me a link, or steps on howto.
url:http://www.ureader.com/gp/1142-1.aspx
The steps are documented in the BOL:
ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/fe20dca9-a4c1-4d32-813d-42f1782dfdd3.htm
Linchi
"achilles silva" wrote:

> Hi All,
> I have a two node cluster, and need to add a third node, can anyone please
> send me a link, or steps on howto.
> url:http://www.ureader.com/gp/1142-1.aspx
>
|||Thank you, read about that, forgot to mention in detail that I am working on
a windows 2003 sp2 and sql 2000 sp4 still.
url:http://www.ureader.com/msg/11421002.aspx
|||For SQL2000, the steps are documented in its BOL under the heading "How to
add nodes to an existing virtual server (Setup)". See also
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/failclus.mspx#ELUAG
Linchi
"achilles silva" wrote:

> Hi All,
> I have a two node cluster, and need to add a third node, can anyone please
> send me a link, or steps on howto.
> url:http://www.ureader.com/gp/1142-1.aspx
>

clustering

in clustering groups i got two nodes node 1 is howing
failed and node2 is showing partially online what does it
mean but resources shows online
If one node is showing failed, then something isn't online. The same for
the other node. You can find details for any errors in the event log.
Mike
Principal Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
"More than just Training"
SQL Server MVP
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
http://www.mssqlserver.com

Clustered SQL Server shut down for third-party application install

Dear Sir,
If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
Steps:
01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
02) Shut down "passive" node server.
03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
05) Install application
06) Reboot active server
07) ....
Is the above procedures ok?
Please advise! Thanks!
Henry
cross-posted to microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
*mike hodgson*
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Henry wrote:

>Dear Sir,
>If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
>and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
>procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
>Steps:
>01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
>02) Shut down "passive" node server.
>03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
>04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
>05) Install application
>06) Reboot active server
>07) ....
> Is the above procedures ok?
>Please advise! Thanks!
>Henry
>
>

Clustered SQL Server shut down for third-party application install

Dear Sir,
If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
Steps:
01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
02) Shut down "passive" node server.
03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
05) Install application
06) Reboot active server
07) ....
Is the above procedures ok?
Please advise! Thanks!
HenryThis is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--030309070404030102020809
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cross-posted to microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
--
*mike hodgson*
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Henry wrote:
>Dear Sir,
>If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
>and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
>procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
>Steps:
>01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
>02) Shut down "passive" node server.
>03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
>04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
>05) Install application
>06) Reboot active server
>07) ....
> Is the above procedures ok?
>Please advise! Thanks!
>Henry
>
>
--030309070404030102020809
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>cross-posted to microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering</tt><br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2">blog:</font><font face="Tahoma" size="2"> <a
href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Henry wrote:
<blockquote cite="midE64C9F95-F0A5-42B5-A7AD-3CE7515EB4FE@.microsoft.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dear Sir,
If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is the
procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
Steps:
01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
02) Shut down "passive" node server.
03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
05) Install application
06) Reboot active server
07) ....
Is the above procedures ok?
Please advise! Thanks!
Henry
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--030309070404030102020809--

Clustered SQL Server shut down for third-party application install

Dear Sir,
If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is th
e
procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
Steps:
01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
02) Shut down "passive" node server.
03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
05) Install application
06) Reboot active server
07) ....
Is the above procedures ok?
Please advise! Thanks!
Henrycross-posted to microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
*mike hodgson*
blog: http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Henry wrote:

>Dear Sir,
>If I needed to install something to the active then passive node one by one
>and required to restart the server serveral times during install, what is t
he
>procedures if I don't want SQL Server to auto startup during reboot?
>Steps:
>01) Offline "passive" node from cluster admin.
>02) Shut down "passive" node server.
>03) Offline "active" node SQL Server Group
>04) From OS Services, change SQL Server to "Not auto startup"
>05) Install application
>06) Reboot active server
>07) ....
> Is the above procedures ok?
>Please advise! Thanks!
>Henry
>
>

Clustered SQL Server freezes & restarts itself in Enterprise Manager

Hi,
In our large organisation we have SQL Server 2000 running on a 2 node cluster using Windows 2000 Advanced Server Clustering. Each node has 2GB RAM. The server has about 10 databases only one of which is significant size at about 1GB. Our website accesses this database via ASP. The website receives between 10000-40000 hits per hour.
The problem is that periodically (not necessarily during high load periods at all) this single database 'freezes' (not the whole server - the other databases seem fine) and refuses all login attempts from the website. This happened again on the weekend when the database was down for about 6 hours. When we go into Enterprise Manager and click on the instance, there is initially no activity for an unusual amount of time but eventually the instance is selected and the tree expands. When this happens everything is ok again and the website can access the database again.
We have only just enabled failure auditing today, so we don't have any info from there and are at a loss as to whats going on. Has anyone out there had similar experiences or have any ideas?

(We will look at upgrading to 2005 and upgrading the machines too but being a big company that will take a lot of time with red tape etc.)

Many thanks.

Hello,

Hopefully not an offensive question, but is there anything in either the win eventlogs or sql errorlog?

Is the problematic databases' filegroup on a seperate drive (resource) to the other db's?

Cheers

Rob

|||Hi Rob,Thanks for the reply. No there was nothing suspicious in the SQL errorlog and nothing strange in the Windows event log either. All of the databases use the same shared storage.Cheers, Nathan.|||

Hi Nathan,

I would have leant towards either blocking or an inordinate amount of locks, however the latter would affect all databases on the instance. Is there a chance the outage is being caused by the db (auto)growing (either log or data)? I think this would only be presented if it were a "large" db...

In order to narrow it down a bit, I'd be create and run a perfmon log, with all the usual suspects: memory,page reads/faults, cpu, tps, log growth, cache hit ratio, user connections etc. Run the log until you encounter the db freeze, and hopefully the perfmon log will at least give you some clue.

Are you sure it's just the one db that freezes, or have you seen if affect others?

Cheers,

Rob

Clustered MegaServers

I assume this term is used for clustering all your Federated Server members.
- Does each node have a SQL Instance installed? If yes, I assume 1 virtual
instance of sql is treated as the main, and all federation members are
configured as linked servers.
- When I create my partitioned views, are the servers connected via linked
servers? Remote servers?
- When issuing a select, how do I use the (nolock) or read-uncommitted
isolation level across linked servers? I don't want to add nolock to a view
that is updateable. How to deal with this? I definitely do not want my select
blocking dml...
- Any tips or tricks or gotchas with this architecture?
- I haven't been able to find definitive documentation on this architecture,
anyone know of some good links or books?
Thanks in advance,
ChrisB
Looks like the technology you are looking for is linked servers, not
clustered servers. Clustered servers is another technology to achieve high
availability. For example, a popular cluster configuration has 2 servers,
one active and one passive, but SQL Server is only running on the active
node. The passive is doing nothing, just waiting to automatically replace
the active node in case this has a problem.
Documentation for both technologies are on the Books Online.
Regards,
Ben Nevarez
"Chris" <Chris@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:48E011E5-DAD0-48A0-B059-2DBFAA2975C7@.microsoft.com...
> I assume this term is used for clustering all your Federated Server
> members.
> - Does each node have a SQL Instance installed? If yes, I assume 1 virtual
> instance of sql is treated as the main, and all federation members are
> configured as linked servers.
> - When I create my partitioned views, are the servers connected via linked
> servers? Remote servers?
> - When issuing a select, how do I use the (nolock) or read-uncommitted
> isolation level across linked servers? I don't want to add nolock to a
> view
> that is updateable. How to deal with this? I definitely do not want my
> select
> blocking dml...
> - Any tips or tricks or gotchas with this architecture?
> - I haven't been able to find definitive documentation on this
> architecture,
> anyone know of some good links or books?
> Thanks in advance,
> ChrisB
>
|||Ben - perhaps you should take a look at this article?
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...msam.mspx#EIAA
Excerpt:
A cluster of SQL Server SMP nodes can do even more. In one benchmark, HP
demonstrated a 32-node cluster of 8-way Xeon processors supporting more than
575,000 concurrent users, and a 53-terabyte database processed 709,220
Transaction Processing Council Benchmark C (TPC-C) transactions per minute
(tpmC), ...
Chris
"Ben Nevarez" wrote:

> Looks like the technology you are looking for is linked servers, not
> clustered servers. Clustered servers is another technology to achieve high
> availability. For example, a popular cluster configuration has 2 servers,
> one active and one passive, but SQL Server is only running on the active
> node. The passive is doing nothing, just waiting to automatically replace
> the active node in case this has a problem.
> Documentation for both technologies are on the Books Online.
> Regards,
> Ben Nevarez
>
>
> "Chris" <Chris@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:48E011E5-DAD0-48A0-B059-2DBFAA2975C7@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||What you are talking about is called a Server Federation and is more akin to
Network Load balancing, which is a scale-out solution. SQL Server Failover
Clustering uses Server Clusters and is a High Availability solution, not a
scaling solution.
Federated Server help scale out by distributing the load across multiple
servers; however, unlike NLB where each web server has an exact copy, each
SQL Server in a federation has an exact copy of the structure, but
partitions the data.
For example, say we have a Customer table. The A through M customers could
be saved to one installation and the N through Z customers to a second. You
could partition more finely and scale out to additional servers in the
Federation. You also use linked servers so that each installation can speak
and pass through to the others.
You would also create Distributed Partitioned Views on each copy of the
database that reassembles the data through UNIONs against the Linked Server
definitions so that each server could represent that view of the data.
Clients would be redirected to a server and be able to query this UNIONed
VIEW, but, more importantly, through the partitioning and CHECK CONSTRAINTs
against the tables, CRUD operations against the VIEW would be redirected to
the appropriate partitioned table.
Pretty complex stuff. Luckily, with SS2K5, Partitioned Tables along with
Partitioned Indexes will make this much easier to implement.
Finally, each server that is a member of a Federation, could in essence be a
Virtual Failover Cluster installation, for High Availability.
In W2K3, both Enterprise and Datacenter Server Editions can support up to 8
nodes within a single Failover Cluster environment. With this, along with
Server Federations, some pretty complex "Clustered MegaServers" could be
envisioned.
Best of luck.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Ben Nevarez" <bnevarez@.sjm.com> wrote in message
news:%23a9SSwZ6FHA.1720@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Looks like the technology you are looking for is linked servers, not
> clustered servers. Clustered servers is another technology to achieve high
> availability. For example, a popular cluster configuration has 2 servers,
> one active and one passive, but SQL Server is only running on the active
> node. The passive is doing nothing, just waiting to automatically replace
> the active node in case this has a problem.
> Documentation for both technologies are on the Books Online.
> Regards,
> Ben Nevarez
>
>
> "Chris" <Chris@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:48E011E5-DAD0-48A0-B059-2DBFAA2975C7@.microsoft.com...
virtual[vbcol=seagreen]
linked
>
|||" Luckily, with SS2K5, Partitioned Tables along with
Partitioned Indexes will make this much easier to implement."
Partitioned tables in SQL05 are partitioned within a single database.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinpub.com
"Anthony Thomas" <ALThomas@.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:%23DzgB1$6FHA.1140@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> What you are talking about is called a Server Federation and is more akin
> to
> Network Load balancing, which is a scale-out solution. SQL Server
> Failover
> Clustering uses Server Clusters and is a High Availability solution, not a
> scaling solution.
> Federated Server help scale out by distributing the load across multiple
> servers; however, unlike NLB where each web server has an exact copy, each
> SQL Server in a federation has an exact copy of the structure, but
> partitions the data.
> For example, say we have a Customer table. The A through M customers
> could
> be saved to one installation and the N through Z customers to a second.
> You
> could partition more finely and scale out to additional servers in the
> Federation. You also use linked servers so that each installation can
> speak
> and pass through to the others.
> You would also create Distributed Partitioned Views on each copy of the
> database that reassembles the data through UNIONs against the Linked
> Server
> definitions so that each server could represent that view of the data.
> Clients would be redirected to a server and be able to query this UNIONed
> VIEW, but, more importantly, through the partitioning and CHECK
> CONSTRAINTs
> against the tables, CRUD operations against the VIEW would be redirected
> to
> the appropriate partitioned table.
> Pretty complex stuff. Luckily, with SS2K5, Partitioned Tables along with
> Partitioned Indexes will make this much easier to implement.
> Finally, each server that is a member of a Federation, could in essence be
> a
> Virtual Failover Cluster installation, for High Availability.
> In W2K3, both Enterprise and Datacenter Server Editions can support up to
> 8
> nodes within a single Failover Cluster environment. With this, along with
> Server Federations, some pretty complex "Clustered MegaServers" could be
> envisioned.
> Best of luck.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "Ben Nevarez" <bnevarez@.sjm.com> wrote in message
> news:%23a9SSwZ6FHA.1720@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> virtual
> linked
>

Cluster/SQL 2005/1 node install

We have setup a MSCS with no problem. Have a SAN with mounted volumes and
installed SQL Server 2005 64-bit Enterprise on Node1. We do not have a Node2,
yet, but we are planning for the future(2008) when we will have a second node.
The installation goes fine. No problems. It ends saying the startup of the
service(s) failed, you will have to start them manually from the Cluster
Administration.
We go to the Cluster Administration and right-click to Bring Online. It
still fails.
Event Log
[sqsrvres] ODBC sqldriverconnect failed
[sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = HY000; native error = 80090322;
message = [Microsoft][SQL Native Client]SQL Network Interfaces: The target
principal name is incorrect.
[sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = HY000; native error = 80090322;
message = [Microsoft][SQL Native Client]Cannot generate SSPI context
SQL Log:
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.1399.06
(X64)
Oct 14 2005 00:35:21
Copyright (c) 1988-2005 Microsoft Corporation
Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 5.2 (Build 3790: Service Pack 2)
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server (c) 2005 Microsoft Corporation.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server All rights reserved.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Server process ID is 5644.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Logging SQL Server messages in file
'M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG'.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server This instance of SQL Server last reported
using a process ID of 4360 at 3/21/2007 2:59:02 PM (local) 3/21/2007 7:59:02
PM (UTC). This is an informational message only; no user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Registry startup parameters:
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -d
M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\master.mdf
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -e M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -l
M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\mastlog.ldf
2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server SQL Server is starting at normal priority
base (=7). This is an informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server Detected 32 CPUs. This is an
informational message; no user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server Cannot use Large Page Extensions: lock
memory privilege was not granted.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.69 Server Using dynamic lock allocation. Initial
allocation of 2500 Lock blocks and 5000 Lock Owner blocks per node. This is
an informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.69 Server Lock partitioning is enabled. This is an
informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Multinode configuration: node 0: CPU
mask: 0x00000000ffff0000 Active CPU mask: 0x00000000ffff0000. This message
provides a description of the NUMA configuration for this computer. This is
an informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Multinode configuration: node 1: CPU
mask: 0x000000000000ffff Active CPU mask: 0x000000000000ffff. This message
provides a description of the NUMA configuration for this computer. This is
an informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Attempting to initialize Microsoft
Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC). This is an informational
message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:52.96 Server Attempting to recover in-doubt
distributed transactions involving Microsoft Distributed Transaction
Coordinator (MS DTC). This is an informational message only. No user action
is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:52.97 Server Database Mirroring Transport is disabled
in the endpoint configuration.
2007-03-21 15:00:52.99 spid6s Starting up database 'master'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.04 spid6s Recovery is writing a checkpoint in
database 'master' (1). This is an informational message only. No user action
is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.07 spid6s SQL Trace ID 1 was started by login "sa".
2007-03-21 15:00:53.08 spid6s Starting up database 'mssqlsystemresource'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid6s Server name is 'SVR-SQL-xx'. This is an
informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid11s Starting up database 'model'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid6s The NETBIOS name of the local node that
is running the server is 'SVR-SQL-yyy'. This is an informational message
only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.18 spid11s Clearing tempdb database.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.25 spid11s Starting up database 'tempdb'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s The Service Broker protocol transport is
disabled or not configured.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s The Database Mirroring protocol transport
is disabled or not configured.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s Service Broker manager has started.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.47 Server A self-generated certificate was
successfully loaded for encryption.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server is listening on [ 10.1.4.188
<ipv4> 1433].
2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server local connection provider is ready
to accept connection on [ \\.\pipe\SQLLocal\MSSQLSERVER ].
2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server named pipe provider is ready to
accept connection on [ \\.\pipe\$$\SVR-SQL-xxx\sql\query ].
2007-03-21 15:00:53.50 Server The SQL Network Interface library could
not register the Service Principal Name (SPN) for the SQL Server service.
Error: 0x2098. Failure to register an SPN may cause integrated authentication
to fall back to NTLM instead of Kerberos. This is an informational message.
Further action is only required if Kerberos authentication is required by
authentication policies.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.50 Server SQL Server is now ready for client
connections. This is an informational message; no user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.55 spid6s Starting up database 'msdb'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.60 spid6s Recovery of any in-doubt distributed
transactions involving Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC)
has completed. This is an informational message only. No user action is
required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.60 spid6s Recovery is complete. This is an
informational message only. No user action is required.
Thanks and God Bless,
ThomBeaux
The service account did not have the:
(local policy) - Act as part of the OS
Thanks and God Bless,
ThomBeaux
"ThomBeaux" wrote:

> We have setup a MSCS with no problem. Have a SAN with mounted volumes and
> installed SQL Server 2005 64-bit Enterprise on Node1. We do not have a Node2,
> yet, but we are planning for the future(2008) when we will have a second node.
> The installation goes fine. No problems. It ends saying the startup of the
> service(s) failed, you will have to start them manually from the Cluster
> Administration.
> We go to the Cluster Administration and right-click to Bring Online. It
> still fails.
> Event Log
> [sqsrvres] ODBC sqldriverconnect failed
> [sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = HY000; native error = 80090322;
> message = [Microsoft][SQL Native Client]SQL Network Interfaces: The target
> principal name is incorrect.
> [sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = HY000; native error = 80090322;
> message = [Microsoft][SQL Native Client]Cannot generate SSPI context
>
> SQL Log:
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.1399.06
> (X64)
> Oct 14 2005 00:35:21
> Copyright (c) 1988-2005 Microsoft Corporation
> Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 5.2 (Build 3790: Service Pack 2)
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server (c) 2005 Microsoft Corporation.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server All rights reserved.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Server process ID is 5644.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Logging SQL Server messages in file
> 'M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server This instance of SQL Server last reported
> using a process ID of 4360 at 3/21/2007 2:59:02 PM (local) 3/21/2007 7:59:02
> PM (UTC). This is an informational message only; no user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Registry startup parameters:
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -d
> M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\master.mdf
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -e M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -l
> M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\mastlog.ldf
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server SQL Server is starting at normal priority
> base (=7). This is an informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server Detected 32 CPUs. This is an
> informational message; no user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server Cannot use Large Page Extensions: lock
> memory privilege was not granted.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.69 Server Using dynamic lock allocation. Initial
> allocation of 2500 Lock blocks and 5000 Lock Owner blocks per node. This is
> an informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.69 Server Lock partitioning is enabled. This is an
> informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Multinode configuration: node 0: CPU
> mask: 0x00000000ffff0000 Active CPU mask: 0x00000000ffff0000. This message
> provides a description of the NUMA configuration for this computer. This is
> an informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Multinode configuration: node 1: CPU
> mask: 0x000000000000ffff Active CPU mask: 0x000000000000ffff. This message
> provides a description of the NUMA configuration for this computer. This is
> an informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Attempting to initialize Microsoft
> Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC). This is an informational
> message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:52.96 Server Attempting to recover in-doubt
> distributed transactions involving Microsoft Distributed Transaction
> Coordinator (MS DTC). This is an informational message only. No user action
> is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:52.97 Server Database Mirroring Transport is disabled
> in the endpoint configuration.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:52.99 spid6s Starting up database 'master'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.04 spid6s Recovery is writing a checkpoint in
> database 'master' (1). This is an informational message only. No user action
> is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.07 spid6s SQL Trace ID 1 was started by login "sa".
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.08 spid6s Starting up database 'mssqlsystemresource'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid6s Server name is 'SVR-SQL-xx'. This is an
> informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid11s Starting up database 'model'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid6s The NETBIOS name of the local node that
> is running the server is 'SVR-SQL-yyy'. This is an informational message
> only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.18 spid11s Clearing tempdb database.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.25 spid11s Starting up database 'tempdb'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s The Service Broker protocol transport is
> disabled or not configured.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s The Database Mirroring protocol transport
> is disabled or not configured.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s Service Broker manager has started.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.47 Server A self-generated certificate was
> successfully loaded for encryption.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server is listening on [ 10.1.4.188
> <ipv4> 1433].
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server local connection provider is ready
> to accept connection on [ \\.\pipe\SQLLocal\MSSQLSERVER ].
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server named pipe provider is ready to
> accept connection on [ \\.\pipe\$$\SVR-SQL-xxx\sql\query ].
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.50 Server The SQL Network Interface library could
> not register the Service Principal Name (SPN) for the SQL Server service.
> Error: 0x2098. Failure to register an SPN may cause integrated authentication
> to fall back to NTLM instead of Kerberos. This is an informational message.
> Further action is only required if Kerberos authentication is required by
> authentication policies.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.50 Server SQL Server is now ready for client
> connections. This is an informational message; no user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.55 spid6s Starting up database 'msdb'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.60 spid6s Recovery of any in-doubt distributed
> transactions involving Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC)
> has completed. This is an informational message only. No user action is
> required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.60 spid6s Recovery is complete. This is an
> informational message only. No user action is required.
>
> --
> Thanks and God Bless,
> ThomBeaux

Cluster/SQL 2005/1 node install

We have setup a MSCS with no problem. Have a SAN with mounted volumes and
installed SQL Server 2005 64-bit Enterprise on Node1. We do not have a Node2,
yet, but we are planning for the future(2008) when we will have a second node.
The installation goes fine. No problems. It ends saying the startup of the
service(s) failed, you will have to start them manually from the Cluster
Administration.
We go to the Cluster Administration and right-click to Bring Online. It
still fails.
Event Log
[sqsrvres] ODBC sqldriverconnect failed
[sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = HY000; native error = 80090322;
message = [Microsoft][SQL Native Client]SQL Network Interfaces: The target
principal name is incorrect.
[sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = HY000; native error = 80090322;
message = [Microsoft][SQL Native Client]Cannot generate SSPI context
SQL Log:
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.1399.06
(X64)
Oct 14 2005 00:35:21
Copyright (c) 1988-2005 Microsoft Corporation
Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 5.2 (Build 3790: Service Pack 2)
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server (c) 2005 Microsoft Corporation.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server All rights reserved.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Server process ID is 5644.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Logging SQL Server messages in file
'M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG'.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server This instance of SQL Server last reported
using a process ID of 4360 at 3/21/2007 2:59:02 PM (local) 3/21/2007 7:59:02
PM (UTC). This is an informational message only; no user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Registry startup parameters:
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -d
M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\master.mdf
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -e M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG
2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -l
M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\mastlog.ldf
2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server SQL Server is starting at normal priority
base (=7). This is an informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server Detected 32 CPUs. This is an
informational message; no user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server Cannot use Large Page Extensions: lock
memory privilege was not granted.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.69 Server Using dynamic lock allocation. Initial
allocation of 2500 Lock blocks and 5000 Lock Owner blocks per node. This is
an informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.69 Server Lock partitioning is enabled. This is an
informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Multinode configuration: node 0: CPU
mask: 0x00000000ffff0000 Active CPU mask: 0x00000000ffff0000. This message
provides a description of the NUMA configuration for this computer. This is
an informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Multinode configuration: node 1: CPU
mask: 0x000000000000ffff Active CPU mask: 0x000000000000ffff. This message
provides a description of the NUMA configuration for this computer. This is
an informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Attempting to initialize Microsoft
Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC). This is an informational
message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:52.96 Server Attempting to recover in-doubt
distributed transactions involving Microsoft Distributed Transaction
Coordinator (MS DTC). This is an informational message only. No user action
is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:52.97 Server Database Mirroring Transport is disabled
in the endpoint configuration.
2007-03-21 15:00:52.99 spid6s Starting up database 'master'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.04 spid6s Recovery is writing a checkpoint in
database 'master' (1). This is an informational message only. No user action
is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.07 spid6s SQL Trace ID 1 was started by login "sa".
2007-03-21 15:00:53.08 spid6s Starting up database 'mssqlsystemresource'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid6s Server name is 'SVR-SQL-xx'. This is an
informational message only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid11s Starting up database 'model'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid6s The NETBIOS name of the local node that
is running the server is 'SVR-SQL-yyy'. This is an informational message
only. No user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.18 spid11s Clearing tempdb database.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.25 spid11s Starting up database 'tempdb'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s The Service Broker protocol transport is
disabled or not configured.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s The Database Mirroring protocol transport
is disabled or not configured.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s Service Broker manager has started.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.47 Server A self-generated certificate was
successfully loaded for encryption.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server is listening on [ 10.1.4.188
<ipv4> 1433].
2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server local connection provider is ready
to accept connection on [ \\.\pipe\SQLLocal\MSSQLSERVER ].
2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server named pipe provider is ready to
accept connection on [ \\.\pipe\$$\SVR-SQL-xxx\sql\query ].
2007-03-21 15:00:53.50 Server The SQL Network Interface library could
not register the Service Principal Name (SPN) for the SQL Server service.
Error: 0x2098. Failure to register an SPN may cause integrated authentication
to fall back to NTLM instead of Kerberos. This is an informational message.
Further action is only required if Kerberos authentication is required by
authentication policies.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.50 Server SQL Server is now ready for client
connections. This is an informational message; no user action is required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.55 spid6s Starting up database 'msdb'.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.60 spid6s Recovery of any in-doubt distributed
transactions involving Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC)
has completed. This is an informational message only. No user action is
required.
2007-03-21 15:00:53.60 spid6s Recovery is complete. This is an
informational message only. No user action is required.
--
Thanks and God Bless,
ThomBeauxThe service account did not have the:
(local policy) - Act as part of the OS
--
Thanks and God Bless,
ThomBeaux
"ThomBeaux" wrote:
> We have setup a MSCS with no problem. Have a SAN with mounted volumes and
> installed SQL Server 2005 64-bit Enterprise on Node1. We do not have a Node2,
> yet, but we are planning for the future(2008) when we will have a second node.
> The installation goes fine. No problems. It ends saying the startup of the
> service(s) failed, you will have to start them manually from the Cluster
> Administration.
> We go to the Cluster Administration and right-click to Bring Online. It
> still fails.
> Event Log
> [sqsrvres] ODBC sqldriverconnect failed
> [sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = HY000; native error = 80090322;
> message = [Microsoft][SQL Native Client]SQL Network Interfaces: The target
> principal name is incorrect.
> [sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = HY000; native error = 80090322;
> message = [Microsoft][SQL Native Client]Cannot generate SSPI context
>
> SQL Log:
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.1399.06
> (X64)
> Oct 14 2005 00:35:21
> Copyright (c) 1988-2005 Microsoft Corporation
> Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 5.2 (Build 3790: Service Pack 2)
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server (c) 2005 Microsoft Corporation.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server All rights reserved.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Server process ID is 5644.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Logging SQL Server messages in file
> 'M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server This instance of SQL Server last reported
> using a process ID of 4360 at 3/21/2007 2:59:02 PM (local) 3/21/2007 7:59:02
> PM (UTC). This is an informational message only; no user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server Registry startup parameters:
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -d
> M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\master.mdf
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -e M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.05 Server -l
> M:\SQLData\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\mastlog.ldf
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server SQL Server is starting at normal priority
> base (=7). This is an informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server Detected 32 CPUs. This is an
> informational message; no user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.07 Server Cannot use Large Page Extensions: lock
> memory privilege was not granted.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.69 Server Using dynamic lock allocation. Initial
> allocation of 2500 Lock blocks and 5000 Lock Owner blocks per node. This is
> an informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.69 Server Lock partitioning is enabled. This is an
> informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Multinode configuration: node 0: CPU
> mask: 0x00000000ffff0000 Active CPU mask: 0x00000000ffff0000. This message
> provides a description of the NUMA configuration for this computer. This is
> an informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Multinode configuration: node 1: CPU
> mask: 0x000000000000ffff Active CPU mask: 0x000000000000ffff. This message
> provides a description of the NUMA configuration for this computer. This is
> an informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:51.71 Server Attempting to initialize Microsoft
> Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC). This is an informational
> message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:52.96 Server Attempting to recover in-doubt
> distributed transactions involving Microsoft Distributed Transaction
> Coordinator (MS DTC). This is an informational message only. No user action
> is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:52.97 Server Database Mirroring Transport is disabled
> in the endpoint configuration.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:52.99 spid6s Starting up database 'master'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.04 spid6s Recovery is writing a checkpoint in
> database 'master' (1). This is an informational message only. No user action
> is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.07 spid6s SQL Trace ID 1 was started by login "sa".
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.08 spid6s Starting up database 'mssqlsystemresource'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid6s Server name is 'SVR-SQL-xx'. This is an
> informational message only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid11s Starting up database 'model'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.13 spid6s The NETBIOS name of the local node that
> is running the server is 'SVR-SQL-yyy'. This is an informational message
> only. No user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.18 spid11s Clearing tempdb database.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.25 spid11s Starting up database 'tempdb'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s The Service Broker protocol transport is
> disabled or not configured.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s The Database Mirroring protocol transport
> is disabled or not configured.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.29 spid14s Service Broker manager has started.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.47 Server A self-generated certificate was
> successfully loaded for encryption.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server is listening on [ 10.1.4.188
> <ipv4> 1433].
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server local connection provider is ready
> to accept connection on [ \\.\pipe\SQLLocal\MSSQLSERVER ].
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.49 Server Server named pipe provider is ready to
> accept connection on [ \\.\pipe\$$\SVR-SQL-xxx\sql\query ].
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.50 Server The SQL Network Interface library could
> not register the Service Principal Name (SPN) for the SQL Server service.
> Error: 0x2098. Failure to register an SPN may cause integrated authentication
> to fall back to NTLM instead of Kerberos. This is an informational message.
> Further action is only required if Kerberos authentication is required by
> authentication policies.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.50 Server SQL Server is now ready for client
> connections. This is an informational message; no user action is required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.55 spid6s Starting up database 'msdb'.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.60 spid6s Recovery of any in-doubt distributed
> transactions involving Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator (MS DTC)
> has completed. This is an informational message only. No user action is
> required.
> 2007-03-21 15:00:53.60 spid6s Recovery is complete. This is an
> informational message only. No user action is required.
>
> --
> Thanks and God Bless,
> ThomBeaux

cluster wizard

Hello!
First excuse me for my english.
J have a cluster windows 2003 EE , and j have installed an instance non
virtual in the first node, with datafile in shared disk.
Well, when j go for upgrade this instance in cluster instance whit sql
cluster wizard, the option upgrade instance in virtual failover it's grey .
Why? Where is can the problem?
Thank's
If it's not an Enterprise Edition CD or if the data files are not on a
shared drive then you won't be able to upgrade from a standalone to a
clustered instance. Was there a problem preventing you from installing it
as a clustered/virtual instance from the original setup?
Cindy Gross, MCDBA, MCSE
http://cindygross.tripod.com
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||The first isntallation is required from Sap installation, after must
clustered single instance.
Thanks for your response.
in ths day verify the situation.
"Cindy Gross (MSFT)" wrote:

> If it's not an Enterprise Edition CD or if the data files are not on a
> shared drive then you won't be able to upgrade from a standalone to a
> clustered instance. Was there a problem preventing you from installing it
> as a clustered/virtual instance from the original setup?
> Cindy Gross, MCDBA, MCSE
> http://cindygross.tripod.com
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>

Cluster with 1 server ok second not

Hi all,
The problem that we have:
We have a SQL cluster which contains 2 windows Adv servers, server X and Y
Y is the primary node, and on that node is a virtual SQL installed, X is the
secondary node, but it needs to be renstalled,
as there is a db running on the cluster, I wonder if it would have impact as
our db needs to stay online and how I need to do that?
Do I need to evict the second node and then renstall it, or just renstall
it?
Do I need to install the virtual SQL also on the second node or not?
Look in BOL for the topic 'Maintaining a failover cluster'. It has step by
step instructions on how to add a node to a running cluster. FYI, it can be
done without stopping the running instance.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Colemont Bert" <colemont.bert@.pi.be> wrote in message
news:%23fxChwEKEHA.628@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> The problem that we have:
> We have a SQL cluster which contains 2 windows Adv servers, server X and Y
> Y is the primary node, and on that node is a virtual SQL installed, X is
the
> secondary node, but it needs to be renstalled,
> as there is a db running on the cluster, I wonder if it would have impact
as
> our db needs to stay online and how I need to do that?
> Do I need to evict the second node and then renstall it, or just
renstall
> it?
> Do I need to install the virtual SQL also on the second node or not?
>
|||Just be sure that you follow the BOL instructions BEFORE evicting the node
at the Windows level. And after you follow the BOL instructions to add the
node back (assuming you do so) apply the latest service pack/hotfix because
adding a node puts back the RTM version on the new node.
Cindy Gross, MCDBA, MCSE
http://cindygross.tripod.com
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||When you apply the latest service pack/hotfix, does it require a down time? My understanding is applying SQL sp/hotfixes, you run it on a virtual server, not at individual nodes.
-- Cindy Gross (MSFT) wrote: --
Just be sure that you follow the BOL instructions BEFORE evicting the node
at the Windows level. And after you follow the BOL instructions to add the
node back (assuming you do so) apply the latest service pack/hotfix because
adding a node puts back the RTM version on the new node.
Cindy Gross, MCDBA, MCSE
http://cindygross.tripod.com
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||It Depends.
The initial service pack or hotfix installation should be done at the node
that owns the resource. This will update all binaries and the share data
files. If you replace a node, you need to update the local binaries only.
That is when you run the installation from that node when it does NOT own
any group resources. The service pack installer will update the local
binaries only. This information is in the readme file for each service
pack.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Samm" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0FEF5270-BEA9-41B0-B315-FE73B3D7532E@.microsoft.com...
> When you apply the latest service pack/hotfix, does it require a down
time? My understanding is applying SQL sp/hotfixes, you run it on a virtual
server, not at individual nodes.
> -- Cindy Gross (MSFT) wrote: --
> Just be sure that you follow the BOL instructions BEFORE evicting the
node
> at the Windows level. And after you follow the BOL instructions to
add the
> node back (assuming you do so) apply the latest service pack/hotfix
because
> adding a node puts back the RTM version on the new node.
> Cindy Gross, MCDBA, MCSE
> http://cindygross.tripod.com
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
>