This past weekend I was challenged a little in resolving what I hoped was a
simple collation issue. We are running Win2K3 Ent. Clustering Services, SQL
Server 2000 Enterprise, b.8.00.760.
On Friday, 2.11, a user migrated an application to this new clustered setup
and immediately received the infamous 446 collation error.
I spent most of Friday evening and all day Saturday reviewing support topics
and news groups. I found that there was 1 issue that could be affecting us -
the build of SQL Server for Win2K3 Ent. Clustering is subtly different than
for Win2KAS Clustering - and all of my research came back to one thing: Run
rebuildm.exe and set the collation of this instance to be the same as the
existing development/production environment. The default setup on the cluster
was different than the previous production setup, as well as different than
the current development environment.
So, I backed everyone's database up, then the master objects, shut the
instance down, executed rebuild and set the collation to what I needed it to
be.
When I brought this user's database online - the same exact error occurs.
Prior to doing this, here is what we were faced with:
Development / Previous Production: Server=Win2K, SQL=SQL Server 2000
Enterprise w/Collate=SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS.
The new clustered SQL=SQL Server Enterprise, w/Collate=Latin1_General_CI_AI.
The database/application in question, at the procedure where we receive the
collation error, basically calls a function that creates a temp table, then
another that pulls data for a report - however, the data is collected as a
JOIN on this tempdb temp object and a series of Views the programmer
previously setup. These views in turn hit various other static tables as well.
We were thinking that because of the collation difference on the new Win2K3
setup, as well as Collation/Locale settings differences with Win2K3
Clustering, we should at a minimum change the instance to match the
SQL_Latin1, etc. collation of development. This however, has not solved the
problem.
At this juncture, the Win2K3 Clustered server has the collation
SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AI, and the development environment (as well as
their current production environment, which is 2KAS nonclustered) is
SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS... The only difference in the two right now is
the accent sensitivity - but this should not be the issue.
If anyone else out there has any feedback, I'd be grateful for your time.
Thanks...
mhamilton"AT"nusoftsolutions"DOT"com
If the collation names are different you'll get the collation conflict
error -- a difference in accent sensitivity is sufficient to expose the
problem.
One option is rebuild master in dev or test (again) so that the two servers
have the same collation. You almost matched the collation last time, but
the different accent sensitivity setting is also critical.
Another option is to make sure that the T-SQL is written in a way that
makes it immune to the problem. For the scenario you describe you could do
this by making sure that your temp tables inherit the collation of the
current user database, not the collation of tempdb. A "COLLATE
database_default" clause will accomplish this. For example, when creating
the temp table in the stored proc:
CREATE TABLE #temp1 (
c1 int,
c2 varchar (30) COLLATE database_default,
c3 char(12) COLLATE database_default,
)
HTH,
Bart
Bart Duncan
Microsoft SQL Server Support
Please reply to the newsgroup only - thanks.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
| Thread-Topic: Collation and Win2K3 Clustered Environment.
| thread-index: AcUUNUWE2BoB7xCnSeWo8pOsRpOhYg==
| X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 12.227.130.93
| From: "=?Utf-8?B?TWlrZUg=?=" <MikeH@.discussions.microsoft.com>
| Subject: Collation and Win2K3 Clustered Environment.
| Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 06:39:08 -0800
| Lines: 51
| Message-ID: <87A19939-8444-4CEC-BBB4-ED092DFFD4D7@.microsoft.com>
| MIME-Version: 1.0
| Content-Type: text/plain;
| charset="Utf-8"
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
| Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
| Importance: normal
| Priority: normal
| X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0
| Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
| NNTP-Posting-Host: TK2MSFTNGXA03.phx.gbl 10.40.1.29
| Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl!TK2MSFT NGXA03.phx.gbl
| Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering:3114
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
|
| This past weekend I was challenged a little in resolving what I hoped was
a
| simple collation issue. We are running Win2K3 Ent. Clustering Services,
SQL
| Server 2000 Enterprise, b.8.00.760.
|
| On Friday, 2.11, a user migrated an application to this new clustered
setup
| and immediately received the infamous 446 collation error.
|
| I spent most of Friday evening and all day Saturday reviewing support
topics
| and news groups. I found that there was 1 issue that could be affecting
us -
| the build of SQL Server for Win2K3 Ent. Clustering is subtly different
than
| for Win2KAS Clustering - and all of my research came back to one thing:
Run
| rebuildm.exe and set the collation of this instance to be the same as the
| existing development/production environment. The default setup on the
cluster
| was different than the previous production setup, as well as different
than
| the current development environment.
|
| So, I backed everyone's database up, then the master objects, shut the
| instance down, executed rebuild and set the collation to what I needed it
to
| be.
|
| When I brought this user's database online - the same exact error occurs.
|
| Prior to doing this, here is what we were faced with:
| Development / Previous Production: Server=Win2K, SQL=SQL Server 2000
| Enterprise w/Collate=SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS.
|
| The new clustered SQL=SQL Server Enterprise,
w/Collate=Latin1_General_CI_AI.
|
| The database/application in question, at the procedure where we receive
the
| collation error, basically calls a function that creates a temp table,
then
| another that pulls data for a report - however, the data is collected as
a
| JOIN on this tempdb temp object and a series of Views the programmer
| previously setup. These views in turn hit various other static tables as
well.
|
| We were thinking that because of the collation difference on the new
Win2K3
| setup, as well as Collation/Locale settings differences with Win2K3
| Clustering, we should at a minimum change the instance to match the
| SQL_Latin1, etc. collation of development. This however, has not solved
the
| problem.
|
| At this juncture, the Win2K3 Clustered server has the collation
| SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AI, and the development environment (as well as
| their current production environment, which is 2KAS nonclustered) is
| SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS... The only difference in the two right now
is
| the accent sensitivity - but this should not be the issue.
|
| If anyone else out there has any feedback, I'd be grateful for your time.
|
| Thanks...
|
| mhamilton"AT"nusoftsolutions"DOT"com
|
|||Bart, thanks for getting back to me.
I must confess, moving from 2KAS Clustering to 2K3 Clustering is NOT fun.
Simply because of the nuances I am finding.
Foremost, I did get the application working, and thus far I have not
experienced the infamous 446 collation error.
However...
This particular cluster is only running 6 instances of SQL Server. Each
instance has the Full Text Search engine/component installed - yet only 2 of
the instances are actually using it - and the problem I ran into is on 1 of
these 2 instances.
Specifically, this instance has the full text search active.
Now...
IF - and I say this 'loudly' - IF the full text server was 'offline' when I
did the rebuild - then restarted the instance and tested the app - the app
failed. Most interesting...
It took me a couple days to see what was happening. So... I did the same
with the full text 'online' and voila!!! I have joy... The application worked
fine.
Now... I have a few questions, but I'm sure you're not going to be able to
answer them anymore than I can. This notwithstanding, I find it interesting
that rebuilding the instance - with the SQL Full Text 'offline' when I do it
-could actually keep it from working. Yes, software is software - but this is
quirky at best.
Anyway... Thank you for responding... I will be in contact with PSS and my
manager on this issue, and if you have any other questions regarding the
setup, please feel free to contact me.
"Bart Duncan [MSFT]" wrote:
> If the collation names are different you'll get the collation conflict
> error -- a difference in accent sensitivity is sufficient to expose the
> problem.
> One option is rebuild master in dev or test (again) so that the two servers
> have the same collation. You almost matched the collation last time, but
> the different accent sensitivity setting is also critical.
> Another option is to make sure that the T-SQL is written in a way that
> makes it immune to the problem. For the scenario you describe you could do
> this by making sure that your temp tables inherit the collation of the
> current user database, not the collation of tempdb. A "COLLATE
> database_default" clause will accomplish this. For example, when creating
> the temp table in the stored proc:
> CREATE TABLE #temp1 (
> c1 int,
> c2 varchar (30) COLLATE database_default,
> c3 char(12) COLLATE database_default,
> )
> HTH,
> Bart
> --
> Bart Duncan
> Microsoft SQL Server Support
> Please reply to the newsgroup only - thanks.
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>
> --
> | Thread-Topic: Collation and Win2K3 Clustered Environment.
> | thread-index: AcUUNUWE2BoB7xCnSeWo8pOsRpOhYg==
> | X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 12.227.130.93
> | From: "=?Utf-8?B?TWlrZUg=?=" <MikeH@.discussions.microsoft.com>
> | Subject: Collation and Win2K3 Clustered Environment.
> | Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 06:39:08 -0800
> | Lines: 51
> | Message-ID: <87A19939-8444-4CEC-BBB4-ED092DFFD4D7@.microsoft.com>
> | MIME-Version: 1.0
> | Content-Type: text/plain;
> | charset="Utf-8"
> | Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> | X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
> | Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
> | Importance: normal
> | Priority: normal
> | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0
> | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
> | NNTP-Posting-Host: TK2MSFTNGXA03.phx.gbl 10.40.1.29
> | Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl!TK2MSFT NGXA03.phx.gbl
> | Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering:3114
> | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
> |
> | This past weekend I was challenged a little in resolving what I hoped was
> a
> | simple collation issue. We are running Win2K3 Ent. Clustering Services,
> SQL
> | Server 2000 Enterprise, b.8.00.760.
> |
> | On Friday, 2.11, a user migrated an application to this new clustered
> setup
> | and immediately received the infamous 446 collation error.
> |
> | I spent most of Friday evening and all day Saturday reviewing support
> topics
> | and news groups. I found that there was 1 issue that could be affecting
> us -
> | the build of SQL Server for Win2K3 Ent. Clustering is subtly different
> than
> | for Win2KAS Clustering - and all of my research came back to one thing:
> Run
> | rebuildm.exe and set the collation of this instance to be the same as the
> | existing development/production environment. The default setup on the
> cluster
> | was different than the previous production setup, as well as different
> than
> | the current development environment.
> |
> | So, I backed everyone's database up, then the master objects, shut the
> | instance down, executed rebuild and set the collation to what I needed it
> to
> | be.
> |
> | When I brought this user's database online - the same exact error occurs.
> |
> | Prior to doing this, here is what we were faced with:
> | Development / Previous Production: Server=Win2K, SQL=SQL Server 2000
> | Enterprise w/Collate=SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS.
> |
> | The new clustered SQL=SQL Server Enterprise,
> w/Collate=Latin1_General_CI_AI.
> |
> | The database/application in question, at the procedure where we receive
> the
> | collation error, basically calls a function that creates a temp table,
> then
> | another that pulls data for a report - however, the data is collected as
> a
> | JOIN on this tempdb temp object and a series of Views the programmer
> | previously setup. These views in turn hit various other static tables as
> well.
> |
> | We were thinking that because of the collation difference on the new
> Win2K3
> | setup, as well as Collation/Locale settings differences with Win2K3
> | Clustering, we should at a minimum change the instance to match the
> | SQL_Latin1, etc. collation of development. This however, has not solved
> the
> | problem.
> |
> | At this juncture, the Win2K3 Clustered server has the collation
> | SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AI, and the development environment (as well as
> | their current production environment, which is 2KAS nonclustered) is
> | SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS... The only difference in the two right now
> is
> | the accent sensitivity - but this should not be the issue.
> |
> | If anyone else out there has any feedback, I'd be grateful for your time.
> |
> | Thanks...
> |
> | mhamilton"AT"nusoftsolutions"DOT"com
> |
>
Showing posts with label clustering. Show all posts
Showing posts with label clustering. Show all posts
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Clusters with "missing" values
Hello all and a happy new year!
I used Microsoft clustering for grouping my data. Even though i already cleaned the data and have no null values i get one cluster with missing values in every attribute. (i set CLUSTER_COUNT=3 and i'm using Scalable k-means algorithm)
Does "missing" mean that the algorithm cannot group that particular tuple in another group so it consider it as missing?
Thank you in advance.
"missing" is an implicit state of any attribute, and is considered whether or not there is missing data or not. For example, a "gender" attribute could have states "Male", "Female" and "missing". An "Age" attribute would have as possible states the age value, or "missing." When clusters are initialized the centroid of the cluster is initialized as a probability of that state being in that cluster, e.g. 45% Male, 50% female, and 5% missing. In general, the initial probabilities are determined by perturbing the distributions of the values shown in the data.
That being said, you say that you are getting a cluster with missing values in every attribute - what is the support of this cluster relative to all the others? It may be possible that you are really only finding two clusters and getting a cluster that is negligable. Could you post the results of SELECT FLATTENED * FROM <model name>.CONTENT?
|||Thank you for you answer it was very helpful!
The support of these cluster is very small comparing to the other clusters (~0,01 -0,02%)
Can i consider those data as outliers and discard them?
Friday, February 24, 2012
Clusters with "missing" values
Hello all and a happy new year!
I used Microsoft clustering for grouping my data. Even though i already cleaned the data and have no null values i get one cluster with missing values in every attribute. (i set CLUSTER_COUNT=3 and i'm using Scalable k-means algorithm)
Does "missing" mean that the algorithm cannot group that particular tuple in another group so it consider it as missing?
Thank you in advance.
"missing" is an implicit state of any attribute, and is considered whether or not there is missing data or not. For example, a "gender" attribute could have states "Male", "Female" and "missing". An "Age" attribute would have as possible states the age value, or "missing." When clusters are initialized the centroid of the cluster is initialized as a probability of that state being in that cluster, e.g. 45% Male, 50% female, and 5% missing. In general, the initial probabilities are determined by perturbing the distributions of the values shown in the data.
That being said, you say that you are getting a cluster with missing values in every attribute - what is the support of this cluster relative to all the others? It may be possible that you are really only finding two clusters and getting a cluster that is negligable. Could you post the results of SELECT FLATTENED * FROM <model name>.CONTENT?
|||Thank you for you answer it was very helpful!
The support of these cluster is very small comparing to the other clusters (~0,01 -0,02%)
Can i consider those data as outliers and discard them?
Clustering/Failover
We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. In
order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on tw
o
stand-alone Windows Servers?
Thanks!Molnir,
Might take a look at:
http://www.databasejournal.com/feat...cle.php/3444181
and
High Availability and Failover Clustering at:
[url]http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/themes/high-availability.mspx[/ur
l]
HTH
Jerry
"Molnir" <Molnir@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B171CF4B-BC63-46D9-88DF-D8F855581A8B@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released.
> In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on
> two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!|||You might save yourself some frustration and also look at Neverfail
(www.neverfialgroup.com)
Jo
Molnir wrote:
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. I
n
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on
two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!
order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on tw
o
stand-alone Windows Servers?
Thanks!Molnir,
Might take a look at:
http://www.databasejournal.com/feat...cle.php/3444181
and
High Availability and Failover Clustering at:
[url]http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/themes/high-availability.mspx[/ur
l]
HTH
Jerry
"Molnir" <Molnir@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B171CF4B-BC63-46D9-88DF-D8F855581A8B@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released.
> In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on
> two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!|||You might save yourself some frustration and also look at Neverfail
(www.neverfialgroup.com)
Jo
Molnir wrote:
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. I
n
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on
two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!
Clustering/Failover
We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. In
order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on two
stand-alone Windows Servers?
Thanks!Molnir,
Might take a look at:
http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mssql/article.php/3444181
and
High Availability and Failover Clustering at:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/themes/high-availability.mspx
HTH
Jerry
"Molnir" <Molnir@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B171CF4B-BC63-46D9-88DF-D8F855581A8B@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released.
> In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on
> two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!|||You might save yourself some frustration and also look at Neverfail
(www.neverfialgroup.com)
Jo
Molnir wrote:
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!
order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on two
stand-alone Windows Servers?
Thanks!Molnir,
Might take a look at:
http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mssql/article.php/3444181
and
High Availability and Failover Clustering at:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/themes/high-availability.mspx
HTH
Jerry
"Molnir" <Molnir@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B171CF4B-BC63-46D9-88DF-D8F855581A8B@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released.
> In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on
> two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!|||You might save yourself some frustration and also look at Neverfail
(www.neverfialgroup.com)
Jo
Molnir wrote:
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!
Clustering/Failover
We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. In
order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on two
stand-alone Windows Servers?
Thanks!
Molnir,
Might take a look at:
http://www.databasejournal.com/featu...le.php/3444181
and
High Availability and Failover Clustering at:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ilability.mspx
HTH
Jerry
"Molnir" <Molnir@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B171CF4B-BC63-46D9-88DF-D8F855581A8B@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released.
> In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on
> two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!
|||You might save yourself some frustration and also look at Neverfail
(www.neverfialgroup.com)
Jo
Molnir wrote:
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!
order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on two
stand-alone Windows Servers?
Thanks!
Molnir,
Might take a look at:
http://www.databasejournal.com/featu...le.php/3444181
and
High Availability and Failover Clustering at:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ilability.mspx
HTH
Jerry
"Molnir" <Molnir@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B171CF4B-BC63-46D9-88DF-D8F855581A8B@.microsoft.com...
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released.
> In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on
> two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!
|||You might save yourself some frustration and also look at Neverfail
(www.neverfialgroup.com)
Jo
Molnir wrote:
> We're looking at moving to the newest version of SQL when it's released. In
> order to take advantage of the clustering capabilities of SQL, do we also
> have to cluster at the OS level, or can you have a SQL cluster running on two
> stand-alone Windows Servers?
> Thanks!
Clustering, virtual sql servers and client network aliases
I have a question regarding the nature of virtual sql servers, specificially what protocol is used to communicate to the server when a request is made by a client.
For example, if a scheduled job is run on the virtual sql server, what determines the protocol used (e.g. TCP/IP, named pipes etc.) by SQL Server agent? Is it the client network alias set up on the virtual server?
I am asking because currently the client aliases on some of our virtual sql servers are using named pipes and I think this is causing a problem with our backups.
Thanks,
Adrian.Sounds like a Windows 2003 cluster running SQL 2000. There is a problem on install that you have to make the named pipe aliases, or the install fails. It sounds like no one cleaned up after themselves after the install. You should be able to remove those aliases (but write down how they were set up, in case you do need them). Clients can talk to virtual SQL Servers on any of the regular protocols.|||Yes, a correct deduction! Thanks for your comments. I am trying to understand the specific role of the client network aliases set up on the virtual sql server. As its a virtual server (essentially a pointer to the active node) does the alias dictate the protocol used?|||When you create the alias, you also identify which of the active protocols (one to a customer) that alias will use.|||Thanks. What I'm trying to get at is the special situation of client network aliases on a virtual sql server. Are they responsible for dictating the protocol used for communication between the virtual server and actual node?|||The aliases are tied to the physical node. Most OS settings are tied only to the physical node, as well, so you have to be careful to keep them both at the same patch level, and with the same settings.
What process are you thinking of that is communicating from the physical node to the virtual server? Most backup packages have support for clusters that do not need to know the name of the physical node. In fact, it is better that they do not know the physical node name, because the physical node name is not actually guaranteed at any point in time.|||Thanks MCrowely. There are some regular SQL backups scheduled but they do not run. Backups can be run manually (through EM or t-sql) and are successful. But when the job is run (manually or automatically as scheduled) it fails.
Diagnosing the problem I have checked the usual things: permissions (e.g. users associated with the context have permission to write a backup file), disk space. Logically, the only factor that might explain it is client network aliases on the virtual server. For failing backups run from the job, aliases use named pipes. Other successful backups are using tcp/ip.
I'd like to fully understand the significance of the aliases on virtual server before I change them and investigate its affect.
Can you shed any additional light on this please?
Thanks.|||Not sure what else to say. Details of how each network protocol works is usually pretty transparent. Perhaps if you looked at step 5 in the workaround?
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815431|||Thanks anyway MCrowley.
I'm going to go ahead with the change to remove the named pipe aliases and replace them with tcp/ip (making a note of original settings and performing it outside business hours!)
For example, if a scheduled job is run on the virtual sql server, what determines the protocol used (e.g. TCP/IP, named pipes etc.) by SQL Server agent? Is it the client network alias set up on the virtual server?
I am asking because currently the client aliases on some of our virtual sql servers are using named pipes and I think this is causing a problem with our backups.
Thanks,
Adrian.Sounds like a Windows 2003 cluster running SQL 2000. There is a problem on install that you have to make the named pipe aliases, or the install fails. It sounds like no one cleaned up after themselves after the install. You should be able to remove those aliases (but write down how they were set up, in case you do need them). Clients can talk to virtual SQL Servers on any of the regular protocols.|||Yes, a correct deduction! Thanks for your comments. I am trying to understand the specific role of the client network aliases set up on the virtual sql server. As its a virtual server (essentially a pointer to the active node) does the alias dictate the protocol used?|||When you create the alias, you also identify which of the active protocols (one to a customer) that alias will use.|||Thanks. What I'm trying to get at is the special situation of client network aliases on a virtual sql server. Are they responsible for dictating the protocol used for communication between the virtual server and actual node?|||The aliases are tied to the physical node. Most OS settings are tied only to the physical node, as well, so you have to be careful to keep them both at the same patch level, and with the same settings.
What process are you thinking of that is communicating from the physical node to the virtual server? Most backup packages have support for clusters that do not need to know the name of the physical node. In fact, it is better that they do not know the physical node name, because the physical node name is not actually guaranteed at any point in time.|||Thanks MCrowely. There are some regular SQL backups scheduled but they do not run. Backups can be run manually (through EM or t-sql) and are successful. But when the job is run (manually or automatically as scheduled) it fails.
Diagnosing the problem I have checked the usual things: permissions (e.g. users associated with the context have permission to write a backup file), disk space. Logically, the only factor that might explain it is client network aliases on the virtual server. For failing backups run from the job, aliases use named pipes. Other successful backups are using tcp/ip.
I'd like to fully understand the significance of the aliases on virtual server before I change them and investigate its affect.
Can you shed any additional light on this please?
Thanks.|||Not sure what else to say. Details of how each network protocol works is usually pretty transparent. Perhaps if you looked at step 5 in the workaround?
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815431|||Thanks anyway MCrowley.
I'm going to go ahead with the change to remove the named pipe aliases and replace them with tcp/ip (making a note of original settings and performing it outside business hours!)
Clustering, sending mail from SQL Server in a cluster
We consolidated sending SQL Server mail from one box in our enterprise,
which has worked out well for us. Now we'd like to consolidate
servers/databases and put it under a clustered environment. But how do we
handle the mail ?
Thanx.
-Cqlboy
Try xpsmtp from www.sqldev.net. It isn't a seamless drop-in, but it is a
lot easier to handle than Outlook on a cluster node. It IS a very stable
component.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Cqlboy" <Cqlboy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC3E45B3-D309-49A9-95D0-0B05C9541665@.microsoft.com...
> We consolidated sending SQL Server mail from one box in our enterprise,
> which has worked out well for us. Now we'd like to consolidate
> servers/databases and put it under a clustered environment. But how do we
> handle the mail ?
> Thanx.
> -Cqlboy
|||Or you could try this if you have iis smtp server installed on the box.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:%23hk$d6k%23EHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Try xpsmtp from www.sqldev.net. It isn't a seamless drop-in, but it is a
> lot easier to handle than Outlook on a cluster node. It IS a very stable
> component.
>
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Cqlboy" <Cqlboy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CC3E45B3-D309-49A9-95D0-0B05C9541665@.microsoft.com...
>
begin 666 sp_SendCDONTSEmail.sql
M04Q415(@.4%)/0T5$55)%('-P7U-E;F1#1$].5%-%;6%I; T*0$9R;VT@.=F%R
M8VAA<B@.Q,# I+ T*0%1O('9A<F-H87(H,3 P,"DL#0I 0T,@.=F%R8VAA<B@.Q
M,# P*2 ]("<G+ T*0$)#0R!V87)C:&%R*#$P,# I/2 G)RP-"D!3=6)J96-T
M('9A<F-H87(H,3 P,"D]("<G+ T*0$)O9'D@.=F%R8VAA<B@.T,# P*3TG)RP-
M"D!!='1A8VA0871H('9A<F-H87(H,3 P*3TG)RP-"D!!='1A8VA.86UE('9A
M<F-H87(H,3 P*3TG)PT*#0I!4PT*#0I$14-,05)%($!#1$].5%,@.:6YT#0I$
M14-,05)%($!H<B!I;G0-"D1%0TQ!4D4@.0%)E='9A;"!I;G0-"D1%0TQ!4D4@.
M0'-O=7)C92!V87)C:&%R*#,P*2 -"D1%0TQ!4D4@.0&1E<V,@.=F%R8VAA<B@.R
M,# I#0H-"D5814,@.0&AR/7-P7T]!0W)E871E(")#1$].5%,N3F5W36%I;"(L
M($!#1$].5%,@.3U54#0H@.(" @.248@.0&AR(#P^(# @.1T]43R!%<G(-"@.T*15A%
M0R! :'(@./2!S<%]/05-E=%!R;W!E<G1Y($!#1$].5%,L("=-86EL1F]R;6%T
M)RP@., T*(" @.($E&($!H<B \/B P($=/5$\@.17)R#0H-"D5814,@.0&AR(#T@.
M<W!?3T%39710<F]P97)T>2! 0T1/3E13+" G1G)O;2<L($!&<F]M#0H@.(" @.
M248@.0&AR(#P^(# @.1T]43R!%<G(-"@.T*15A%0R! :'(@./2!S<%]/05-E=%!R
M;W!E<G1Y($!#1$].5%,L("=4;R<L($!4;PT*(" @.($E&($!H<B \/B P($=/
M5$\@.17)R#0H-"D5814,@.0&AR(#T@.<W!?3T%39710<F]P97)T>2! 0T1/3E13
M+" G0V,G+"! 0T,-"B @.("!)1B! :'(@./#X@.,"!'3U1/($5R<@.T*#0I%6$5#
M($!H<B ]('-P7T]!4V5T4')O<&5R='D@.0$-$3TY44RP@.)T)C8R<L($!"0T,-
M"B @.("!)1B! :'(@./#X@.,"!'3U1/($5R<@.T*#0I%6$5#($!H<B ]('-P7T]!
M4V5T4')O<&5R='D@.0$-$3TY44RP@.)U-U8FIE8W0G+"! 4W5B:F5C= T*(" @.
M($E&($!H<B \/B P($=/5$\@.17)R#0H-"D5814,@.0&AR(#T@.<W!?3T%39710
M<F]P97)T>2! 0T1/3E13+" G0F]D>2<L($!";V1Y#0H@.(" @.248@.0&AR(#P^
M(# @.1T]43R!%<G(-"@.T*248@.0$%T=&%C:%!A=&@.@./#X@.)R<@.#0H)0D5'24X-
M"@.E04DE.5"! 071T86-H4&%T: T*+2T)15A%0R! :'(]<W!?3T%-971H;V0@.
M0$-$3TY44RP@.(D%T=&%C:$9I;&4B("P@.0$%T=&%C:%!A=&@.@.3U54( "P@.0$%T
M=&%C:$YA;64@.3U54#0H)15A%0R! :'(]<W!?3T%-971H;V0@.0$-$3TY44RP@.
M(D%T=&%C:$9I;&4B("P@.3E5,3"P@.($!3;W5R8V4]0$%T=&%C:%!A=&@.@.3U54
M("P@.0$9I;&5.86UE/4!!='1A8VA.86UE($]55 T*"4E&($!H<B \/B P($=/
M5$\@.17)R#0H)14Y$#0I%6$5#($!H<CUS<%]/04UE=&AO9"! 0T1/3E13+" B
M4V5N9"(-"B @.("!)1B! :'(@./#X@.,"!'3U1/($5R<@.T*#0I'3U1/($1O;F4-
M"B @.(" -"D5R<CH-"B @.("!204E315)23U(@.*"=%<G)O<B!S96YD:6YG(&5M
M86EL('5S:6YG(&-D;VYT<RX@.)RP@.,38L(#$I#0H@.(" @.15A%0R!S<%]/04=E
M=$5R<F]R26YF;R!.54Q,+"! <V]U<F-E($]55"P@.0&1E<V,@.3U54#0H@.(" @.
M4T5,14-4(&AR/4-/3E9%4E0H0DE.05)9*#0I("Q :'(I+"!S;W5R8V4]0'-O
M=7)C92P-"B @.(" @.(" @.9&5S8W)I<'1I;VX]0&1E<V,-"@.T*1&]N93H@.(" @.
E#0H@.(" @.15A%0R!S<%]/041E<W1R;WD@.0$-$3TY44PT*1T\-"@.``
`
end
|||IIS on a SQL cluster host? Not my ideal setup.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Steve Woodhams" <stevew@.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7tidnZ2tgt39cXrcRVnyig@.brightview.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Or you could try this if you have iis smtp server installed on the box.
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
> news:%23hk$d6k%23EHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
a[vbcol=seagreen]
stable
>
>
|||Rather have iis than use outlook. Anyway our final solution was to just have
a send email stored procedure that writes to a table. We then have a .net
service that just reads the table and sends the emails from another box
using cdonts.
Shout if you want the source.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:%23kMCyJl%23EHA.2156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> IIS on a SQL cluster host? Not my ideal setup.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Steve Woodhams" <stevew@.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7tidnZ2tgt39cXrcRVnyig@.brightview.com...
> a
> stable
>
|||Greg Linwood wrote a series of articles on how to build an asynchronous
email system around xpsmtp. I would probably go with that if I needed
anything more sophisticated than what I built.
Thanks,
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Steve Woodhams" <stevew@.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:09OdnfD8y5d7cnrcRVnyiQ@.brightview.com...
> Rather have iis than use outlook. Anyway our final solution was to just
have[vbcol=seagreen]
> a send email stored procedure that writes to a table. We then have a .net
> service that just reads the table and sends the emails from another box
> using cdonts.
> Shout if you want the source.
>
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
> news:%23kMCyJl%23EHA.2156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
is
>
|||"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:%23kMCyJl%23EHA.2156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> IIS on a SQL cluster host? Not my ideal setup.
>
Actually this is exactly what we do. But not the way you're thinking.
We use xp_sendmail quite a bit (mostly because it's so convenient for
scheduled tasks to use it.)
Then we use the SMTP component only (no web, ftp services) of IIS on the
same box and point the Outlook client to that. That prevents it from
locking up due to Outlook timing out due to the SMTP server not being
available.
Then of course the SQL server is completely firewalled off from the outside
world, so no one can connect to any ports on it.
Since I've done this and installed SP3a I don't think I've had a single
issue with SQL Mail. Oh, and this is on a cluster that's failed over at
least once.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Steve Woodhams" <stevew@.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7tidnZ2tgt39cXrcRVnyig@.brightview.com...
is[vbcol=seagreen]
> a
> stable
enterprise,[vbcol=seagreen]
do
>
which has worked out well for us. Now we'd like to consolidate
servers/databases and put it under a clustered environment. But how do we
handle the mail ?
Thanx.
-Cqlboy
Try xpsmtp from www.sqldev.net. It isn't a seamless drop-in, but it is a
lot easier to handle than Outlook on a cluster node. It IS a very stable
component.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Cqlboy" <Cqlboy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC3E45B3-D309-49A9-95D0-0B05C9541665@.microsoft.com...
> We consolidated sending SQL Server mail from one box in our enterprise,
> which has worked out well for us. Now we'd like to consolidate
> servers/databases and put it under a clustered environment. But how do we
> handle the mail ?
> Thanx.
> -Cqlboy
|||Or you could try this if you have iis smtp server installed on the box.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:%23hk$d6k%23EHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Try xpsmtp from www.sqldev.net. It isn't a seamless drop-in, but it is a
> lot easier to handle than Outlook on a cluster node. It IS a very stable
> component.
>
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Cqlboy" <Cqlboy@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CC3E45B3-D309-49A9-95D0-0B05C9541665@.microsoft.com...
>
begin 666 sp_SendCDONTSEmail.sql
M04Q415(@.4%)/0T5$55)%('-P7U-E;F1#1$].5%-%;6%I; T*0$9R;VT@.=F%R
M8VAA<B@.Q,# I+ T*0%1O('9A<F-H87(H,3 P,"DL#0I 0T,@.=F%R8VAA<B@.Q
M,# P*2 ]("<G+ T*0$)#0R!V87)C:&%R*#$P,# I/2 G)RP-"D!3=6)J96-T
M('9A<F-H87(H,3 P,"D]("<G+ T*0$)O9'D@.=F%R8VAA<B@.T,# P*3TG)RP-
M"D!!='1A8VA0871H('9A<F-H87(H,3 P*3TG)RP-"D!!='1A8VA.86UE('9A
M<F-H87(H,3 P*3TG)PT*#0I!4PT*#0I$14-,05)%($!#1$].5%,@.:6YT#0I$
M14-,05)%($!H<B!I;G0-"D1%0TQ!4D4@.0%)E='9A;"!I;G0-"D1%0TQ!4D4@.
M0'-O=7)C92!V87)C:&%R*#,P*2 -"D1%0TQ!4D4@.0&1E<V,@.=F%R8VAA<B@.R
M,# I#0H-"D5814,@.0&AR/7-P7T]!0W)E871E(")#1$].5%,N3F5W36%I;"(L
M($!#1$].5%,@.3U54#0H@.(" @.248@.0&AR(#P^(# @.1T]43R!%<G(-"@.T*15A%
M0R! :'(@./2!S<%]/05-E=%!R;W!E<G1Y($!#1$].5%,L("=-86EL1F]R;6%T
M)RP@., T*(" @.($E&($!H<B \/B P($=/5$\@.17)R#0H-"D5814,@.0&AR(#T@.
M<W!?3T%39710<F]P97)T>2! 0T1/3E13+" G1G)O;2<L($!&<F]M#0H@.(" @.
M248@.0&AR(#P^(# @.1T]43R!%<G(-"@.T*15A%0R! :'(@./2!S<%]/05-E=%!R
M;W!E<G1Y($!#1$].5%,L("=4;R<L($!4;PT*(" @.($E&($!H<B \/B P($=/
M5$\@.17)R#0H-"D5814,@.0&AR(#T@.<W!?3T%39710<F]P97)T>2! 0T1/3E13
M+" G0V,G+"! 0T,-"B @.("!)1B! :'(@./#X@.,"!'3U1/($5R<@.T*#0I%6$5#
M($!H<B ]('-P7T]!4V5T4')O<&5R='D@.0$-$3TY44RP@.)T)C8R<L($!"0T,-
M"B @.("!)1B! :'(@./#X@.,"!'3U1/($5R<@.T*#0I%6$5#($!H<B ]('-P7T]!
M4V5T4')O<&5R='D@.0$-$3TY44RP@.)U-U8FIE8W0G+"! 4W5B:F5C= T*(" @.
M($E&($!H<B \/B P($=/5$\@.17)R#0H-"D5814,@.0&AR(#T@.<W!?3T%39710
M<F]P97)T>2! 0T1/3E13+" G0F]D>2<L($!";V1Y#0H@.(" @.248@.0&AR(#P^
M(# @.1T]43R!%<G(-"@.T*248@.0$%T=&%C:%!A=&@.@./#X@.)R<@.#0H)0D5'24X-
M"@.E04DE.5"! 071T86-H4&%T: T*+2T)15A%0R! :'(]<W!?3T%-971H;V0@.
M0$-$3TY44RP@.(D%T=&%C:$9I;&4B("P@.0$%T=&%C:%!A=&@.@.3U54( "P@.0$%T
M=&%C:$YA;64@.3U54#0H)15A%0R! :'(]<W!?3T%-971H;V0@.0$-$3TY44RP@.
M(D%T=&%C:$9I;&4B("P@.3E5,3"P@.($!3;W5R8V4]0$%T=&%C:%!A=&@.@.3U54
M("P@.0$9I;&5.86UE/4!!='1A8VA.86UE($]55 T*"4E&($!H<B \/B P($=/
M5$\@.17)R#0H)14Y$#0I%6$5#($!H<CUS<%]/04UE=&AO9"! 0T1/3E13+" B
M4V5N9"(-"B @.("!)1B! :'(@./#X@.,"!'3U1/($5R<@.T*#0I'3U1/($1O;F4-
M"B @.(" -"D5R<CH-"B @.("!204E315)23U(@.*"=%<G)O<B!S96YD:6YG(&5M
M86EL('5S:6YG(&-D;VYT<RX@.)RP@.,38L(#$I#0H@.(" @.15A%0R!S<%]/04=E
M=$5R<F]R26YF;R!.54Q,+"! <V]U<F-E($]55"P@.0&1E<V,@.3U54#0H@.(" @.
M4T5,14-4(&AR/4-/3E9%4E0H0DE.05)9*#0I("Q :'(I+"!S;W5R8V4]0'-O
M=7)C92P-"B @.(" @.(" @.9&5S8W)I<'1I;VX]0&1E<V,-"@.T*1&]N93H@.(" @.
E#0H@.(" @.15A%0R!S<%]/041E<W1R;WD@.0$-$3TY44PT*1T\-"@.``
`
end
|||IIS on a SQL cluster host? Not my ideal setup.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Steve Woodhams" <stevew@.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7tidnZ2tgt39cXrcRVnyig@.brightview.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Or you could try this if you have iis smtp server installed on the box.
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
> news:%23hk$d6k%23EHA.3756@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
a[vbcol=seagreen]
stable
>
>
|||Rather have iis than use outlook. Anyway our final solution was to just have
a send email stored procedure that writes to a table. We then have a .net
service that just reads the table and sends the emails from another box
using cdonts.
Shout if you want the source.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:%23kMCyJl%23EHA.2156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> IIS on a SQL cluster host? Not my ideal setup.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Steve Woodhams" <stevew@.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7tidnZ2tgt39cXrcRVnyig@.brightview.com...
> a
> stable
>
|||Greg Linwood wrote a series of articles on how to build an asynchronous
email system around xpsmtp. I would probably go with that if I needed
anything more sophisticated than what I built.
Thanks,
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Steve Woodhams" <stevew@.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:09OdnfD8y5d7cnrcRVnyiQ@.brightview.com...
> Rather have iis than use outlook. Anyway our final solution was to just
have[vbcol=seagreen]
> a send email stored procedure that writes to a table. We then have a .net
> service that just reads the table and sends the emails from another box
> using cdonts.
> Shout if you want the source.
>
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
> news:%23kMCyJl%23EHA.2156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
is
>
|||"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:%23kMCyJl%23EHA.2156@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> IIS on a SQL cluster host? Not my ideal setup.
>
Actually this is exactly what we do. But not the way you're thinking.
We use xp_sendmail quite a bit (mostly because it's so convenient for
scheduled tasks to use it.)
Then we use the SMTP component only (no web, ftp services) of IIS on the
same box and point the Outlook client to that. That prevents it from
locking up due to Outlook timing out due to the SMTP server not being
available.
Then of course the SQL server is completely firewalled off from the outside
world, so no one can connect to any ports on it.
Since I've done this and installed SP3a I don't think I've had a single
issue with SQL Mail. Oh, and this is on a cluster that's failed over at
least once.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Steve Woodhams" <stevew@.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7tidnZ2tgt39cXrcRVnyig@.brightview.com...
is[vbcol=seagreen]
> a
> stable
enterprise,[vbcol=seagreen]
do
>
Clustering, Security, Performance, Load Balance
I think this question has been asked number of times. However, I am
looking for some specific information. Perhaps some of you can help
close the gap. Or perhaps you can point me towards right direction.
What sort of clustering do you have in mind? Clustering in MS SQL
Server is all about high availablility. That is two or more machines
that share disk. If one machine dies, another in the machine in the
cluster can take over very quickly.
Yes, there are security features in MS SQL Server. :-)
You can encrypt data in SQL 2005, and you can also use SSL for
encrypting the connection.
I'm not sure that I understand these questions. But if they were asked
with a scale-out solution like Oracle's RAC in mind, they are not
applicable to SQL Server.
>
>
>
What sort of clustering do you have in mind? Clustering in MS SQL
Server is all about high availablility. That is two or more machines
that share disk. If one machine dies, another in the machine in the
cluster can take over very quickly.
>
I know that in other products, clustering is about scalinng out, but
MS SQL Server does not offering anything like that.
>
>
Yes, there are security features in MS SQL Server. :-)
>
>
You can encrypt data in SQL 2005, and you can also use SSL for
encrypting the connection.
>
>
I'm not sure that I understand these questions. But if they were asked
with a scale-out solution like Oracle's RAC in mind, they are not
applicable to SQL Server.
>
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esq...@.sommarskog.se
>
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 athttp://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books...
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 athttp://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx
How does the database perform and what is the criteria for the
performance matrix? To clarify, how will one collect performance data
related to MS-SQLserver? What is the criteria for collecting such
data?|||Manish (marora@.gmail.com) writes:
You can use performance counters, Profiler, query dynamic management views.
I'm afraid that I can't answer why you would like to collect some data.
Or I am not understanding your question.
looking for some specific information. Perhaps some of you can help
close the gap. Or perhaps you can point me towards right direction.
Perhaps this group can help me fill in ms-sqlserver related following
questions.
1. Do this database have data Clustering capabilities?
1a. If yes, what mechanism is used such as shared disk, share nothing,
etc.
2. Do these dB have Security features?
2a. If yes, what security features are supported? For instance do they
support encryption or SSL connection?
3. How does the database perform and what is the criteria for the
performance matrix?
4. Do they have inbuilt load balance capabilities?
I want to thank everyone for taking your time to read this
correspondence. I will also greatly appreciate your efforts in sharing
your thoughts.
Regards,
ManishManish (marora@.gmail.com) writes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I think this question has been asked number of times. However, I am
looking for some specific information. Perhaps some of you can help
close the gap. Or perhaps you can point me towards right direction.
>
Perhaps this group can help me fill in ms-sqlserver related following
questions.
>
1. Do this database have data Clustering capabilities?
1a. If yes, what mechanism is used such as shared disk, share nothing,
etc.
What sort of clustering do you have in mind? Clustering in MS SQL
Server is all about high availablility. That is two or more machines
that share disk. If one machine dies, another in the machine in the
cluster can take over very quickly.
I know that in other products, clustering is about scalinng out, but
MS SQL Server does not offering anything like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2. Do these dB have Security features?
Yes, there are security features in MS SQL Server. :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2a. If yes, what security features are supported? For instance do they
support encryption or SSL connection?
You can encrypt data in SQL 2005, and you can also use SSL for
encrypting the connection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
3. How does the database perform and what is the criteria for the
performance matrix?
4. Do they have inbuilt load balance capabilities?
I'm not sure that I understand these questions. But if they were asked
with a scale-out solution like Oracle's RAC in mind, they are not
applicable to SQL Server.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx|||On Nov 27, 5:38 pm, Erland Sommarskog <esq...@.sommarskog.sewrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Manish (mar...@.gmail.com) writes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I think this question has been asked number of times. However, I am
looking for some specific information. Perhaps some of you can help
close the gap. Or perhaps you can point me towards right direction.
>
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Perhaps this group can help me fill in ms-sqlserver related following
questions.
>
Quote:
Originally Posted by
1. Do this database have data Clustering capabilities?
1a. If yes, what mechanism is used such as shared disk, share nothing,
etc.
>
What sort of clustering do you have in mind? Clustering in MS SQL
Server is all about high availablility. That is two or more machines
that share disk. If one machine dies, another in the machine in the
cluster can take over very quickly.
>
I know that in other products, clustering is about scalinng out, but
MS SQL Server does not offering anything like that.
>
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2. Do these dB have Security features?
>
Yes, there are security features in MS SQL Server. :-)
>
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2a. If yes, what security features are supported? For instance do they
support encryption or SSL connection?
>
You can encrypt data in SQL 2005, and you can also use SSL for
encrypting the connection.
>
Quote:
Originally Posted by
3. How does the database perform and what is the criteria for the
performance matrix?
4. Do they have inbuilt load balance capabilities?
>
I'm not sure that I understand these questions. But if they were asked
with a scale-out solution like Oracle's RAC in mind, they are not
applicable to SQL Server.
>
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esq...@.sommarskog.se
>
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 athttp://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books...
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 athttp://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx
How does the database perform and what is the criteria for the
performance matrix? To clarify, how will one collect performance data
related to MS-SQLserver? What is the criteria for collecting such
data?|||Manish (marora@.gmail.com) writes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
How does the database perform and what is the criteria for the
performance matrix? To clarify, how will one collect performance data
related to MS-SQLserver?
You can use performance counters, Profiler, query dynamic management views.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
What is the criteria for collecting such data?
I'm afraid that I can't answer why you would like to collect some data.
Or I am not understanding your question.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx
Clustering, can I force a cluster?
I've been using some of the data mining capability in SQL 2005, and have been very impressed. But I've mostly been using decision trees/neural nets, and now have a problem that would seem to require clustering, but I'm not sure how to approach it...
Have list of parts by serial number and part number, and in a data cube have crunched a bunch of data to give me each parts' relative reliability.
So what I can do so far is to ask the cube "for a certain part number, which specific serial numbers are our 'bad actors'", ie have an unacceptably high failure rate compared to the average, by standard deviation.
The next logical question would be... what factors do these particular "bad" parts have in common? Environmental exposure, usage rates, a particular repair facility, etc etc. I have that type of raw data in other tables, no problem.
So what it seems like I would want to do is force a clustering algorithm to choose a certain segment of parts as a cluster and then use DM to determine what characteristics those parts share. Then we could see if there was any corrective action we could take, or whether we should just chuck those parts in the bin (if the DM didn't find any reasonable relationships between the parts). But I don't know enough about the clustering/association type DM to figure it out.
How does the group think I could approach this?
Geof
It may be difficult to identify a natural cluster containing only parts with a high failure rate.
I think you could recast this question as "what attributes influence a part's failure rate?"
As you have the data easily available you should be able to build a single table with facility codes, usage rates, environmental factors and failure rate. Or the tables of usage, environmental factors etc could be nested tables keyed to the parts table.
With this data structure, you could build a Na?ve Bayes model with the failure rate as the predictable: the visualizers will help you to understand the significance of different attributes.
To simplify the analysis, you could create and calculate a new boolean column such as HighFailureRate which flagged failures over a certain threshold..
You might even like to use the Data Mining Add-ins for Office. If you can build your unified view in Excel, then the Analyze Key Influencers feature of the Table Analysis tools will make this task even easier for you. All you will need to do is to format your data as a table in Excel; select Analyze Key Influencers from the Analyze tab of the ribbon; and finally select the Failure Rate (or HighFailureRate flag) column to analyze.
hth
|||Interesting, I had assumed Clustering (or a variation) would be the best method.
But I see your logic there. I've used boolean columns like you've described to good effect in some of the other models.
I've previously also extracted the Model Content data to a SQL DB and then used some recursive queries to find the 'whys' for predictions, so I think I can probably adapt that technique to this scenario.
Thanks for your thoughts! I've head in this direction and see where it takes me.
(Unfortunately, I can't use Office 2007 yet until it's approved by our security/configuration folks, so the DM add-ins aren't an option yet. They sound great though!)
Geof
|||Another thing to try is since you can identify the items with high failure rates, simply cluster those. You won't find out factors that discriminate between failure and non failure, but will determine patterns that show different types of failures. For example, I was able to find different classes of malignant tumors on a cancer dataset this way.
Other options are to build predictive models as Donald suggests and then build cluster models on all items that are predicted to be failures (whether they are or not) and predicted not to be failures (whether they are or not) - then you can see the distribution of failures across the clusters in each section to see if there are identifiable classes of items that are misclassified.
Another is to simply run clustering across all attributes (possibly even excluding the failure attribute) and use the cluster label as an input to a predictive algorithm such as decision trees. This is essentially a way to combine many attributes into a single attribute for further mining.
HTH
-Jamie
Clustering without shared disk array?
Hi all,
We have 3 server, compaq 570ML and try to find out the way to increase
availability and fault tolarency with MS SQL 2k server, W2k AS. I heard SQL
failover clustering is not possible without disk array, is it no way?
Regards
That is correct. You will need a shared data source that the cluster
software can arbitrate between the host nodes.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Dan" <leedh@.nicstech.com> wrote in message
news:v7mrc.47393$xQ6.569121@.news.bora.net...
> Hi all,
> We have 3 server, compaq 570ML and try to find out the way to increase
> availability and fault tolarency with MS SQL 2k server, W2k AS. I heard
SQL
> failover clustering is not possible without disk array, is it no way?
> Regards
>
|||Yes you do have to have a shared drive in order to install a SQL Server
cluster.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
|||Not according to this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...Fwct040604.asp
There seems to be a lot of confusion around this issue. You do need a mechanism for the databases to synchronize, but they do not have to be on a shared disk array. In fact, a shared disk array creates a single point of failure. You do need a "shared driv
e" - as in a file share - for the quorum resource, but that's not a shared disk.
I am about to create a geographically dispersed cluster and am planning to try this. Perhaps I will have a different answer after actually trying it.
Doug
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" wrote:
> Yes you do have to have a shared drive in order to install a SQL Server
> cluster.
>
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
|||That right. It is possible if a third party vendor builds a geographic solution based on MNS clusters.
But for a local SQL Server cluster, you might be better off implementing a standard server cluster. You must weigh your options.
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way to do this is to visit the following websites:
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
We have 3 server, compaq 570ML and try to find out the way to increase
availability and fault tolarency with MS SQL 2k server, W2k AS. I heard SQL
failover clustering is not possible without disk array, is it no way?
Regards
That is correct. You will need a shared data source that the cluster
software can arbitrate between the host nodes.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Dan" <leedh@.nicstech.com> wrote in message
news:v7mrc.47393$xQ6.569121@.news.bora.net...
> Hi all,
> We have 3 server, compaq 570ML and try to find out the way to increase
> availability and fault tolarency with MS SQL 2k server, W2k AS. I heard
SQL
> failover clustering is not possible without disk array, is it no way?
> Regards
>
|||Yes you do have to have a shared drive in order to install a SQL Server
cluster.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
|||Not according to this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...Fwct040604.asp
There seems to be a lot of confusion around this issue. You do need a mechanism for the databases to synchronize, but they do not have to be on a shared disk array. In fact, a shared disk array creates a single point of failure. You do need a "shared driv
e" - as in a file share - for the quorum resource, but that's not a shared disk.
I am about to create a geographically dispersed cluster and am planning to try this. Perhaps I will have a different answer after actually trying it.
Doug
"Rand Boyd [MSFT]" wrote:
> Yes you do have to have a shared drive in order to install a SQL Server
> cluster.
>
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
|||That right. It is possible if a third party vendor builds a geographic solution based on MNS clusters.
But for a local SQL Server cluster, you might be better off implementing a standard server cluster. You must weigh your options.
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way to do this is to visit the following websites:
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx
Clustering with W2K3 and SQL 2005 (64bit) - best practice setup
Hi
I'm a little confused how best to setup a new 2005 deployment. I'm
moving from a 2000 environment, which used Legato's AAM software to
support failover. The new environment will use MS clustering.
The 2000 setup has multiple instances on each node, and each instance
can run on 3 out of 4 of the 4-node setup. With MS, it looks like each
instance has to have it's own 'virtual server'. So, in this setup,
named instances seem a bit redundant, since you can name the virtual
server. EG Why use Server1\Inst1, Server2\Inst2, when
Server1\<default>, Server2\<default> is just as informative
So, my questions are: 1) is it good practice to use named instances in
a clustered setup;
and 2) what is the rationale behind restricting a virtual server to a
single instance
Thanks.
You only get one default instance per cluster, not per virtual server.
Personally, I only use named instances to avoid name style confusion.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"steve" <stevester@.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:e4c23b50-bc07-450c-94f7-b71ed051c4bc@.e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> I'm a little confused how best to setup a new 2005 deployment. I'm
> moving from a 2000 environment, which used Legato's AAM software to
> support failover. The new environment will use MS clustering.
> The 2000 setup has multiple instances on each node, and each instance
> can run on 3 out of 4 of the 4-node setup. With MS, it looks like each
> instance has to have it's own 'virtual server'. So, in this setup,
> named instances seem a bit redundant, since you can name the virtual
> server. EG Why use Server1\Inst1, Server2\Inst2, when
> Server1\<default>, Server2\<default> is just as informative
> So, my questions are: 1) is it good practice to use named instances in
> a clustered setup;
> and 2) what is the rationale behind restricting a virtual server to a
> single instance
> Thanks.
|||On 3 Dec, 14:23, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> You only get one default instance per cluster, not per virtual server.
> Personally, I only use named instances to avoid name style confusion.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "steve" <steves...@.freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:e4c23b50-bc07-450c-94f7-b71ed051c4bc@.e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks Geoff. So I can't use deafult instances with each additional
virtual server.
I'm still puzzled why you can only have one instance per virtual
server tho. - seems overly restrictive.
|||It has to do with how SQL organizes binaries for different instances. Or
mor accurately, how multiple instances were handled in SQL 2000.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"steve" <stevester@.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:1a8e02f1-ca6b-44b3-84ee-b0589802b2c8@.j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
> On 3 Dec, 14:23, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Geoff. So I can't use deafult instances with each additional
> virtual server.
> I'm still puzzled why you can only have one instance per virtual
> server tho. - seems overly restrictive.
|||"steve" <stevester@.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:e4c23b50-bc07-450c-94f7-b71ed051c4bc@.e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> The 2000 setup has multiple instances on each node, and each instance
> can run on 3 out of 4 of the 4-node setup. With MS, it looks like each
> instance has to have it's own 'virtual server'. So, in this setup,
> named instances seem a bit redundant, since you can name the virtual
> server. EG Why use Server1\Inst1, Server2\Inst2, when
> Server1\<default>, Server2\<default> is just as informative
Each virtual server must be an instance. You can only have one default
instance per cluster and the rest have to be named instances.
> So, my questions are: 1) is it good practice to use named instances in
> a clustered setup;
You should only used named instances in a cluster. There are some known
issues around patching that can cause problems, for example, if you service
pack a named instance before the default.
> and 2) what is the rationale behind restricting a virtual server to a
> single instance
Each instance requires its own resources, thus, each requires its own
virtual server.
Russ Kaufmann
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
ClusterHelp.com, a Microsoft Certified Gold Partner
Web http://www.clusterhelp.com
Blog http://msmvps.com/clusterhelp
The next ClusterHelp classes are:
Dec 10 - 13 in Denver
Jan 18 - 31 in Denver
|||Thanks for your answers - very helpful.
Steve
I'm a little confused how best to setup a new 2005 deployment. I'm
moving from a 2000 environment, which used Legato's AAM software to
support failover. The new environment will use MS clustering.
The 2000 setup has multiple instances on each node, and each instance
can run on 3 out of 4 of the 4-node setup. With MS, it looks like each
instance has to have it's own 'virtual server'. So, in this setup,
named instances seem a bit redundant, since you can name the virtual
server. EG Why use Server1\Inst1, Server2\Inst2, when
Server1\<default>, Server2\<default> is just as informative
So, my questions are: 1) is it good practice to use named instances in
a clustered setup;
and 2) what is the rationale behind restricting a virtual server to a
single instance
Thanks.
You only get one default instance per cluster, not per virtual server.
Personally, I only use named instances to avoid name style confusion.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"steve" <stevester@.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:e4c23b50-bc07-450c-94f7-b71ed051c4bc@.e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> I'm a little confused how best to setup a new 2005 deployment. I'm
> moving from a 2000 environment, which used Legato's AAM software to
> support failover. The new environment will use MS clustering.
> The 2000 setup has multiple instances on each node, and each instance
> can run on 3 out of 4 of the 4-node setup. With MS, it looks like each
> instance has to have it's own 'virtual server'. So, in this setup,
> named instances seem a bit redundant, since you can name the virtual
> server. EG Why use Server1\Inst1, Server2\Inst2, when
> Server1\<default>, Server2\<default> is just as informative
> So, my questions are: 1) is it good practice to use named instances in
> a clustered setup;
> and 2) what is the rationale behind restricting a virtual server to a
> single instance
> Thanks.
|||On 3 Dec, 14:23, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> You only get one default instance per cluster, not per virtual server.
> Personally, I only use named instances to avoid name style confusion.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "steve" <steves...@.freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:e4c23b50-bc07-450c-94f7-b71ed051c4bc@.e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks Geoff. So I can't use deafult instances with each additional
virtual server.
I'm still puzzled why you can only have one instance per virtual
server tho. - seems overly restrictive.
|||It has to do with how SQL organizes binaries for different instances. Or
mor accurately, how multiple instances were handled in SQL 2000.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"steve" <stevester@.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:1a8e02f1-ca6b-44b3-84ee-b0589802b2c8@.j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
> On 3 Dec, 14:23, "Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCrafts...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Geoff. So I can't use deafult instances with each additional
> virtual server.
> I'm still puzzled why you can only have one instance per virtual
> server tho. - seems overly restrictive.
|||"steve" <stevester@.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:e4c23b50-bc07-450c-94f7-b71ed051c4bc@.e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> The 2000 setup has multiple instances on each node, and each instance
> can run on 3 out of 4 of the 4-node setup. With MS, it looks like each
> instance has to have it's own 'virtual server'. So, in this setup,
> named instances seem a bit redundant, since you can name the virtual
> server. EG Why use Server1\Inst1, Server2\Inst2, when
> Server1\<default>, Server2\<default> is just as informative
Each virtual server must be an instance. You can only have one default
instance per cluster and the rest have to be named instances.
> So, my questions are: 1) is it good practice to use named instances in
> a clustered setup;
You should only used named instances in a cluster. There are some known
issues around patching that can cause problems, for example, if you service
pack a named instance before the default.
> and 2) what is the rationale behind restricting a virtual server to a
> single instance
Each instance requires its own resources, thus, each requires its own
virtual server.
Russ Kaufmann
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
ClusterHelp.com, a Microsoft Certified Gold Partner
Web http://www.clusterhelp.com
Blog http://msmvps.com/clusterhelp
The next ClusterHelp classes are:
Dec 10 - 13 in Denver
Jan 18 - 31 in Denver
|||Thanks for your answers - very helpful.
Steve
Clustering with SQL2005 Standard Edition
I see that the new SQL 2005 Standard edition supports 2-node
clustering. Does that mean that Standard edition could be used in a 4
node N+1 scenario set-up as follows:
Node 1: File Server
Node 2: Exchange Server
Node 3: SQL 2005 Standard
Node 4: Dedicated failover node for 1,2 & 3
Only Nodes 3 and 4 will ever be running SQL2005. So would standard be
suitable or would SQL2005 Enterprise edition be needed?
Cheers,
Ian
Ian Robinson, Belfast, UK
<http://www.canicula.com/wp/>
Hi
Standard 2005 would suffice, but you still need the Enterprise Edition of
the Windows 2003 to do clustering.
Be very careful as to the features you need from the SQL Server edition.
There are a lot of performance features that are only available on
Enterprise Edition.
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/
"Ian Robinson" <junk@.canicula.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BF93850800056921F0386550@.news.gradwell .net...
>I see that the new SQL 2005 Standard edition supports 2-node
> clustering. Does that mean that Standard edition could be used in a 4
> node N+1 scenario set-up as follows:
> Node 1: File Server
> Node 2: Exchange Server
> Node 3: SQL 2005 Standard
> Node 4: Dedicated failover node for 1,2 & 3
> Only Nodes 3 and 4 will ever be running SQL2005. So would standard be
> suitable or would SQL2005 Enterprise edition be needed?
> Cheers,
> Ian
> --
> Ian Robinson, Belfast, UK
> <http://www.canicula.com/wp/>
>
|||Hi Mike,
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 18:20:28 +0000, Mike Epprecht \(SQL MVP\) wrote
(in article <#I#xC7v4FHA.3880@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>):
> Standard 2005 would suffice,
Good stuff.
> but you still need the Enterprise Edition of
> the Windows 2003 to do clustering.
Yep. I thought I would.
> Be very careful as to the features you need from the SQL Server edition.
> There are a lot of performance features that are only available on
> Enterprise Edition.
I've told the client in question that. We're doing an infrastructure
upgrade and putting a base SQL installation so that it'll be there when
they go to market next year to get a new LOB system based on SQL2005.
I've told them that if they go with Standard edition it may not suit
the development house they choose. They are okay with this and will
upgrade to Enterprise next year if they have to. Their call. I've
advised them to go with enterprise now but I can't force them :-)
Thanks for the answer.
Ian
Ian Robinson, Belfast, UK
<http://www.canicula.com/wp/>
clustering. Does that mean that Standard edition could be used in a 4
node N+1 scenario set-up as follows:
Node 1: File Server
Node 2: Exchange Server
Node 3: SQL 2005 Standard
Node 4: Dedicated failover node for 1,2 & 3
Only Nodes 3 and 4 will ever be running SQL2005. So would standard be
suitable or would SQL2005 Enterprise edition be needed?
Cheers,
Ian
Ian Robinson, Belfast, UK
<http://www.canicula.com/wp/>
Hi
Standard 2005 would suffice, but you still need the Enterprise Edition of
the Windows 2003 to do clustering.
Be very careful as to the features you need from the SQL Server edition.
There are a lot of performance features that are only available on
Enterprise Edition.
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/
"Ian Robinson" <junk@.canicula.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BF93850800056921F0386550@.news.gradwell .net...
>I see that the new SQL 2005 Standard edition supports 2-node
> clustering. Does that mean that Standard edition could be used in a 4
> node N+1 scenario set-up as follows:
> Node 1: File Server
> Node 2: Exchange Server
> Node 3: SQL 2005 Standard
> Node 4: Dedicated failover node for 1,2 & 3
> Only Nodes 3 and 4 will ever be running SQL2005. So would standard be
> suitable or would SQL2005 Enterprise edition be needed?
> Cheers,
> Ian
> --
> Ian Robinson, Belfast, UK
> <http://www.canicula.com/wp/>
>
|||Hi Mike,
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 18:20:28 +0000, Mike Epprecht \(SQL MVP\) wrote
(in article <#I#xC7v4FHA.3880@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>):
> Standard 2005 would suffice,
Good stuff.
> but you still need the Enterprise Edition of
> the Windows 2003 to do clustering.
Yep. I thought I would.
> Be very careful as to the features you need from the SQL Server edition.
> There are a lot of performance features that are only available on
> Enterprise Edition.
I've told the client in question that. We're doing an infrastructure
upgrade and putting a base SQL installation so that it'll be there when
they go to market next year to get a new LOB system based on SQL2005.
I've told them that if they go with Standard edition it may not suit
the development house they choose. They are okay with this and will
upgrade to Enterprise next year if they have to. Their call. I've
advised them to go with enterprise now but I can't force them :-)
Thanks for the answer.
Ian
Ian Robinson, Belfast, UK
<http://www.canicula.com/wp/>
Clustering with sql and third party database softwares
I have a clustered enviroment made of 2 win2k advanced servers
clustered in a network. Servers are running sql 2000 that hosts a third
party database X. Now X was working perfectly until these servers were
clustered. Users accessed X via a citrix client. Any idea as to why
accessing this third party database (X) became slower after being
placed in a clustered enviroment? Please feel free to come back with
any solutions.
Thanks
Hi
Did you have the exact same hardware setup before you clustered? A badly
implemented SAN can blow your performance.
Is each instance allocated the same amount of RAM as before clustering?
Run performance monitor and see what type of bottlenecks are shown. You did
not give much information about what is slower so I can't really pin point
the problem.
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/
<dafeuwotu@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1121623805.177041.48990@.f14g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...
>I have a clustered enviroment made of 2 win2k advanced servers
> clustered in a network. Servers are running sql 2000 that hosts a third
> party database X. Now X was working perfectly until these servers were
> clustered. Users accessed X via a citrix client. Any idea as to why
> accessing this third party database (X) became slower after being
> placed in a clustered enviroment? Please feel free to come back with
> any solutions.
> Thanks
>
clustered in a network. Servers are running sql 2000 that hosts a third
party database X. Now X was working perfectly until these servers were
clustered. Users accessed X via a citrix client. Any idea as to why
accessing this third party database (X) became slower after being
placed in a clustered enviroment? Please feel free to come back with
any solutions.
Thanks
Hi
Did you have the exact same hardware setup before you clustered? A badly
implemented SAN can blow your performance.
Is each instance allocated the same amount of RAM as before clustering?
Run performance monitor and see what type of bottlenecks are shown. You did
not give much information about what is slower so I can't really pin point
the problem.
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/
<dafeuwotu@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1121623805.177041.48990@.f14g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...
>I have a clustered enviroment made of 2 win2k advanced servers
> clustered in a network. Servers are running sql 2000 that hosts a third
> party database X. Now X was working perfectly until these servers were
> clustered. Users accessed X via a citrix client. Any idea as to why
> accessing this third party database (X) became slower after being
> placed in a clustered enviroment? Please feel free to come back with
> any solutions.
> Thanks
>
Clustering with share nothing
Hello,
We're are in the basic design process for a cluster. We have some confusion
as to whether SQL Server clustering supports a share nothing scenario - that
is where the clustered machines have their own storage and do not share
storage.
We're trying to find out if this is supported, and if it is, what are the
downsides to this approach versus using a shared storage device.
Any help or comments greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Greg Hayes
Funny you should use that term. Microsoft uses the shared nothing model,
only it means that the controlling node does not share with any other
node(s). One node owns a resource at a time.
You can get what you need from Majority Node Set (MNS) read all about it
here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...lustergeo.mspx
or view an excellent webcast here:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;838612
lastly Tech Net has some great information here:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...g/majnode.mspx
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
"Greg Hayes" <grandgousier@.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eYUZj8qaEHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> We're are in the basic design process for a cluster. We have some
confusion
> as to whether SQL Server clustering supports a share nothing scenario -
that
> is where the clustered machines have their own storage and do not share
> storage.
> We're trying to find out if this is supported, and if it is, what are the
> downsides to this approach versus using a shared storage device.
> Any help or comments greatly appreciated.
> Thank you,
> Greg Hayes
>
|||But as far as I know, SQL 2000 does not support MNS.
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Epprecht Consulting (PTY) LTD
Johannesburg, South Africa
Mobile: +27-82-552-0268
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
Specialist SQL Server Solutions and Consulting
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:ewrY7QsaEHA.1732@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Funny you should use that term. Microsoft uses the shared nothing model,
> only it means that the controlling node does not share with any other
> node(s). One node owns a resource at a time.
> You can get what you need from Majority Node Set (MNS) read all about it
> here:
>
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...lustergeo.mspx
> or view an excellent webcast here:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;838612
> lastly Tech Net has some great information here:
>
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...g/majnode.mspx[vbcol=seagreen]
> Cheers,
> Rod
> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
> http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
> "Greg Hayes" <grandgousier@.verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:eYUZj8qaEHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> confusion
> that
the
>
|||That is true. So third party time it is ;)
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:uci3tezaEHA.3752@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> But as far as I know, SQL 2000 does not support MNS.
> --
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Epprecht Consulting (PTY) LTD
> Johannesburg, South Africa
> Mobile: +27-82-552-0268
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> Specialist SQL Server Solutions and Consulting
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
> message news:ewrY7QsaEHA.1732@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...lustergeo.mspx
>
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...g/majnode.mspx[vbcol=seagreen]
scenario -[vbcol=seagreen]
share
> the
>
We're are in the basic design process for a cluster. We have some confusion
as to whether SQL Server clustering supports a share nothing scenario - that
is where the clustered machines have their own storage and do not share
storage.
We're trying to find out if this is supported, and if it is, what are the
downsides to this approach versus using a shared storage device.
Any help or comments greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Greg Hayes
Funny you should use that term. Microsoft uses the shared nothing model,
only it means that the controlling node does not share with any other
node(s). One node owns a resource at a time.
You can get what you need from Majority Node Set (MNS) read all about it
here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...lustergeo.mspx
or view an excellent webcast here:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;838612
lastly Tech Net has some great information here:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...g/majnode.mspx
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
"Greg Hayes" <grandgousier@.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eYUZj8qaEHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> We're are in the basic design process for a cluster. We have some
confusion
> as to whether SQL Server clustering supports a share nothing scenario -
that
> is where the clustered machines have their own storage and do not share
> storage.
> We're trying to find out if this is supported, and if it is, what are the
> downsides to this approach versus using a shared storage device.
> Any help or comments greatly appreciated.
> Thank you,
> Greg Hayes
>
|||But as far as I know, SQL 2000 does not support MNS.
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Epprecht Consulting (PTY) LTD
Johannesburg, South Africa
Mobile: +27-82-552-0268
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
Specialist SQL Server Solutions and Consulting
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:ewrY7QsaEHA.1732@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Funny you should use that term. Microsoft uses the shared nothing model,
> only it means that the controlling node does not share with any other
> node(s). One node owns a resource at a time.
> You can get what you need from Majority Node Set (MNS) read all about it
> here:
>
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...lustergeo.mspx
> or view an excellent webcast here:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;838612
> lastly Tech Net has some great information here:
>
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...g/majnode.mspx[vbcol=seagreen]
> Cheers,
> Rod
> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
> http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
> "Greg Hayes" <grandgousier@.verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:eYUZj8qaEHA.3804@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> confusion
> that
the
>
|||That is true. So third party time it is ;)
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:uci3tezaEHA.3752@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> But as far as I know, SQL 2000 does not support MNS.
> --
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Epprecht Consulting (PTY) LTD
> Johannesburg, South Africa
> Mobile: +27-82-552-0268
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> Specialist SQL Server Solutions and Consulting
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
> message news:ewrY7QsaEHA.1732@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...lustergeo.mspx
>
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...g/majnode.mspx[vbcol=seagreen]
scenario -[vbcol=seagreen]
share
> the
>
Clustering with NAS
Has anyone clustered SQL server 2000 using a NAS server (eg. Dell PowerVault
745N) as the shared storage? I know that SAN is recommended but costs are
vastly higher. Any reasons as to why it shouldn't be done would be helpful.
thanks - pete.
Hi
NAS is not fully supported. If you are going to build a cluster, make sure
that all the components are on the Windows Hardware Compatibility List for
Clustering. If not, don't expect support from Microsoft when things go bad.
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/
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e7$cBT9XFHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Has anyone clustered SQL server 2000 using a NAS server (eg. Dell
> PowerVault 745N) as the shared storage? I know that SAN is recommended but
> costs are vastly higher. Any reasons as to why it shouldn't be done would
> be helpful.
> thanks - pete.
>
|||Not being supported by Microsoft is a good enough reason for me to not try
it...
There are cheaper failover options that are less hardware strict, such as a
product called double-take (www.nsisoftware.com no affiliation...)
Kevin Hill
President
3NF Consulting
www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
www.DallasDBAs.com/forum - new DB forum for Dallas/Ft. Worth area DBAs.
www.experts-exchange.com - experts compete for points to answer your
questions
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e7$cBT9XFHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Has anyone clustered SQL server 2000 using a NAS server (eg. Dell
> PowerVault 745N) as the shared storage? I know that SAN is recommended but
> costs are vastly higher. Any reasons as to why it shouldn't be done would
> be helpful.
> thanks - pete.
>
|||Hi Mike,
Thanks for the response. Whilst I appreciate that clustering with NAS is not
supported by Microsoft, I'm interested to find out if people are actually
doing it. If they are and it seems to be reliable enough then i'd imagine it
would be worth the cost saving.
thanks - pete.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:OQXq%23c9XFHA.3464@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> NAS is not fully supported. If you are going to build a cluster, make sure
> that all the components are on the Windows Hardware Compatibility List for
> Clustering. If not, don't expect support from Microsoft when things go
> bad.
> 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/
> "Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e7$cBT9XFHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi Kevin,
I'm looking for an Active/Active cluster solution - not a passive failover
one.
thanks - pete.
"Kevin3NF" <KHill@.NopeIDontNeedNoSPAM3NF-inc.com> wrote in message
news:eBgCxe9XFHA.584@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Not being supported by Microsoft is a good enough reason for me to not try
> it...
> There are cheaper failover options that are less hardware strict, such as
> a product called double-take (www.nsisoftware.com no affiliation...)
> --
> Kevin Hill
> President
> 3NF Consulting
> www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> www.DallasDBAs.com/forum - new DB forum for Dallas/Ft. Worth area DBAs.
> www.experts-exchange.com - experts compete for points to answer your
> questions
>
> "Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e7$cBT9XFHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Basic Question...what is more important to you? Data or Price?
If you don't mind loosing data in a supposedly "high availability" scenario,
then do it the cheap way.
Is your network and switches as reliable as 99.999%? If not, when they fail,
and you end up with data corruption.
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/
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:u6trGh9XFHA.3620@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi Mike,
> Thanks for the response. Whilst I appreciate that clustering with NAS is
> not supported by Microsoft, I'm interested to find out if people are
> actually doing it. If they are and it seems to be reliable enough then i'd
> imagine it would be worth the cost saving.
> thanks - pete.
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:OQXq%23c9XFHA.3464@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||The internal network and switches are certainly 99.999% reliable (or at
least have been over the last year!). I'm more interested in peoples
practical experiences rather than the obvious value of data argument. I see
that Microsoft are beginning to support iSCSI - any experience with that?
thanks - pete.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:uSShGp9XFHA.1240@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Basic Question...what is more important to you? Data or Price?
> If you don't mind loosing data in a supposedly "high availability"
> scenario, then do it the cheap way.
> Is your network and switches as reliable as 99.999%? If not, when they
> fail, and you end up with data corruption.
> 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/
> "Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:u6trGh9XFHA.3620@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
|||Well, I've been at 3 customers who used non-HCL equipment, 2 of them used a
NAS. Well, they all had one option, revert to yesterday's good backup. One
was an investment bank that lost about US$ 50 million due to the failure.
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/
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OjS0X39XFHA.3876@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> The internal network and switches are certainly 99.999% reliable (or at
> least have been over the last year!). I'm more interested in peoples
> practical experiences rather than the obvious value of data argument. I
> see that Microsoft are beginning to support iSCSI - any experience with
> that?
> thanks - pete.
>
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:uSShGp9XFHA.1240@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi Mike,
Ah - that's not good! That's the kind of info i'm after - real world cases -
thanks. Have you had any experience with using iSCSI in these setups?
pete.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:%23M0e0C%23XFHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Well, I've been at 3 customers who used non-HCL equipment, 2 of them used
> a NAS. Well, they all had one option, revert to yesterday's good backup.
> One was an investment bank that lost about US$ 50 million due to the
> failure.
> 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/
> "Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:OjS0X39XFHA.3876@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi
No. Not iSCSI. After the IT Directors got a good beating by the
shareholders, they all went SAN.
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/
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OrxoIL%23XFHA.2756@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi Mike,
> Ah - that's not good! That's the kind of info i'm after - real world
> cases - thanks. Have you had any experience with using iSCSI in these
> setups?
> pete.
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:%23M0e0C%23XFHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
745N) as the shared storage? I know that SAN is recommended but costs are
vastly higher. Any reasons as to why it shouldn't be done would be helpful.
thanks - pete.
Hi
NAS is not fully supported. If you are going to build a cluster, make sure
that all the components are on the Windows Hardware Compatibility List for
Clustering. If not, don't expect support from Microsoft when things go bad.
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/
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e7$cBT9XFHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Has anyone clustered SQL server 2000 using a NAS server (eg. Dell
> PowerVault 745N) as the shared storage? I know that SAN is recommended but
> costs are vastly higher. Any reasons as to why it shouldn't be done would
> be helpful.
> thanks - pete.
>
|||Not being supported by Microsoft is a good enough reason for me to not try
it...
There are cheaper failover options that are less hardware strict, such as a
product called double-take (www.nsisoftware.com no affiliation...)
Kevin Hill
President
3NF Consulting
www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
www.DallasDBAs.com/forum - new DB forum for Dallas/Ft. Worth area DBAs.
www.experts-exchange.com - experts compete for points to answer your
questions
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e7$cBT9XFHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Has anyone clustered SQL server 2000 using a NAS server (eg. Dell
> PowerVault 745N) as the shared storage? I know that SAN is recommended but
> costs are vastly higher. Any reasons as to why it shouldn't be done would
> be helpful.
> thanks - pete.
>
|||Hi Mike,
Thanks for the response. Whilst I appreciate that clustering with NAS is not
supported by Microsoft, I'm interested to find out if people are actually
doing it. If they are and it seems to be reliable enough then i'd imagine it
would be worth the cost saving.
thanks - pete.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:OQXq%23c9XFHA.3464@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> NAS is not fully supported. If you are going to build a cluster, make sure
> that all the components are on the Windows Hardware Compatibility List for
> Clustering. If not, don't expect support from Microsoft when things go
> bad.
> 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/
> "Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e7$cBT9XFHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi Kevin,
I'm looking for an Active/Active cluster solution - not a passive failover
one.
thanks - pete.
"Kevin3NF" <KHill@.NopeIDontNeedNoSPAM3NF-inc.com> wrote in message
news:eBgCxe9XFHA.584@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Not being supported by Microsoft is a good enough reason for me to not try
> it...
> There are cheaper failover options that are less hardware strict, such as
> a product called double-take (www.nsisoftware.com no affiliation...)
> --
> Kevin Hill
> President
> 3NF Consulting
> www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> www.DallasDBAs.com/forum - new DB forum for Dallas/Ft. Worth area DBAs.
> www.experts-exchange.com - experts compete for points to answer your
> questions
>
> "Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e7$cBT9XFHA.3300@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Basic Question...what is more important to you? Data or Price?
If you don't mind loosing data in a supposedly "high availability" scenario,
then do it the cheap way.
Is your network and switches as reliable as 99.999%? If not, when they fail,
and you end up with data corruption.
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/
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:u6trGh9XFHA.3620@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi Mike,
> Thanks for the response. Whilst I appreciate that clustering with NAS is
> not supported by Microsoft, I'm interested to find out if people are
> actually doing it. If they are and it seems to be reliable enough then i'd
> imagine it would be worth the cost saving.
> thanks - pete.
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:OQXq%23c9XFHA.3464@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||The internal network and switches are certainly 99.999% reliable (or at
least have been over the last year!). I'm more interested in peoples
practical experiences rather than the obvious value of data argument. I see
that Microsoft are beginning to support iSCSI - any experience with that?
thanks - pete.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:uSShGp9XFHA.1240@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Basic Question...what is more important to you? Data or Price?
> If you don't mind loosing data in a supposedly "high availability"
> scenario, then do it the cheap way.
> Is your network and switches as reliable as 99.999%? If not, when they
> fail, and you end up with data corruption.
> 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/
> "Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:u6trGh9XFHA.3620@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
|||Well, I've been at 3 customers who used non-HCL equipment, 2 of them used a
NAS. Well, they all had one option, revert to yesterday's good backup. One
was an investment bank that lost about US$ 50 million due to the failure.
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/
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OjS0X39XFHA.3876@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> The internal network and switches are certainly 99.999% reliable (or at
> least have been over the last year!). I'm more interested in peoples
> practical experiences rather than the obvious value of data argument. I
> see that Microsoft are beginning to support iSCSI - any experience with
> that?
> thanks - pete.
>
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:uSShGp9XFHA.1240@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi Mike,
Ah - that's not good! That's the kind of info i'm after - real world cases -
thanks. Have you had any experience with using iSCSI in these setups?
pete.
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:%23M0e0C%23XFHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Well, I've been at 3 customers who used non-HCL equipment, 2 of them used
> a NAS. Well, they all had one option, revert to yesterday's good backup.
> One was an investment bank that lost about US$ 50 million due to the
> failure.
> 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/
> "Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:OjS0X39XFHA.3876@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
|||Hi
No. Not iSCSI. After the IT Directors got a good beating by the
shareholders, they all went SAN.
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/
"Pete Waters" <petewaters008@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OrxoIL%23XFHA.2756@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi Mike,
> Ah - that's not good! That's the kind of info i'm after - real world
> cases - thanks. Have you had any experience with using iSCSI in these
> setups?
> pete.
>
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
> news:%23M0e0C%23XFHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
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...
>
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 Vs. Log Shipping
Hi All,
Is anyone can tell me the difference between log shipping and clustering? I look at it and I think that this is the same thing as they use two different servers.
TIA
No they are not even close, Clustering is hardware operation that let your application failover to a live standby through a configuration called heart beat while Log Shipping let you within a few minutes create a new running version of your database. If you are in SQL Server 2005 it comes with something called database Mirroring as of service pack 1 it is almost but not quite Clustering because the change over is smoother than Log Shipping so almost like hardware Clustering. Run a search for database Mirroring in SQL Server BOL(books online). Hope this helps.|||Thank you Caddre.
But what make me confused is that they both have 2 different server. So, in terms of cost they are almost the same. Then, the only difference that I see is the time delay. Clustering would be faster to recover than Log Shipping. Also, Log Shipping only copy the transaction log (what is that means?)
TIA
|||Not quite because Cluster boxes are very expensive but you can configure any box to do Log Shipping, because the later is just a dedicated Backup/Restore operation, while the former is a smooth invisible failover through Active/Passive or Active/Active configuration based on the hardware vendor's provided features in the Cluster box. So Log Shipping could be cheap available to most users who can afford the extra box while Cluster is expensive hardware and may require extra hardware components beyound the Cluster box to use and skilled System/Database Admin. Hope this helps.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms188698.aspx
|||Thank you Gift,
I am clear now.
|||
ronnyr:
Thank you Gift,
I am clear now.
I am glad I could help.
Clustering VS Replication
We have a SQL 2000 server that we are about to upgrade to SQL 2005. This
server is running on Server 2003 standard. We would like to set up a second
SQL 2005 server and either do clustering or replication so that we would be
able to access our data in the event of a single server failure.
Which is the "better' solution and what are the minimum OS requirements for
both? In either case, each server will be running its own local disk array
that would contain the OS and the databaeses.
Thanx...Jon
Windows Clustering requires a shared disk array and all the equipment must
be on the Clustering Hardware Compatibility List. Replication does not
require any special hardware but is not usually used for DR although some
do. You might want to look at using Log shipping or even the new Database
Mirroring features. Both are documented in BooksOnLine.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:505EE799-B615-4220-96C5-F5A7EDE71F74@.microsoft.com...
> We have a SQL 2000 server that we are about to upgrade to SQL 2005. This
> server is running on Server 2003 standard. We would like to set up a
> second
> SQL 2005 server and either do clustering or replication so that we would
> be
> able to access our data in the event of a single server failure.
> Which is the "better' solution and what are the minimum OS requirements
> for
> both? In either case, each server will be running its own local disk array
> that would contain the OS and the databaeses.
> Thanx...Jon
|||"Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:505EE799-B615-4220-96C5-F5A7EDE71F74@.microsoft.com...
> We have a SQL 2000 server that we are about to upgrade to SQL 2005. This
> server is running on Server 2003 standard. We would like to set up a
> second
> SQL 2005 server and either do clustering or replication so that we would
> be
> able to access our data in the event of a single server failure.
> Which is the "better' solution and what are the minimum OS requirements
> for
> both? In either case, each server will be running its own local disk array
> that would contain the OS and the databaeses.
>
Well clustering is a shared-disk solution. Replication, Log Shipping and
Database Mirroring are all options, though.
David
|||Actually DB mirroring sounds like what we might need. We have a recent SQL
server crash and it's too critical a piece to not have some kind of DR
process in place. The more I read about clustering the more I am unsure that
this is the way I'd like to go. What we would like is for the data to be in
two places both running SQL Server and if one server goes down, the other
would automatically or with minimal effort pick up the slack...Which if the
processes you mentioned would be the best?
Thanx...Jon
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> Windows Clustering requires a shared disk array and all the equipment must
> be on the Clustering Hardware Compatibility List. Replication does not
> require any special hardware but is not usually used for DR although some
> do. You might want to look at using Log shipping or even the new Database
> Mirroring features. Both are documented in BooksOnLine.
>
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:505EE799-B615-4220-96C5-F5A7EDE71F74@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Hi
That is DB Mirroring, available for SQL Server 2005 early 2006.
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/
"Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C3C5AE8-3A63-4DD3-AD76-A79E4C13969F@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Actually DB mirroring sounds like what we might need. We have a recent SQL
> server crash and it's too critical a piece to not have some kind of DR
> process in place. The more I read about clustering the more I am unsure
> that
> this is the way I'd like to go. What we would like is for the data to be
> in
> two places both running SQL Server and if one server goes down, the other
> would automatically or with minimal effort pick up the slack...Which if
> the
> processes you mentioned would be the best?
> Thanx...Jon
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
|||As Mike stated that is what Mirroring is made for. But Log Shipping is also
a viable alternative and is available now. It has a longer time to be up
and running after a failover but that is configurable with how often you log
ship.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C3C5AE8-3A63-4DD3-AD76-A79E4C13969F@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Actually DB mirroring sounds like what we might need. We have a recent SQL
> server crash and it's too critical a piece to not have some kind of DR
> process in place. The more I read about clustering the more I am unsure
> that
> this is the way I'd like to go. What we would like is for the data to be
> in
> two places both running SQL Server and if one server goes down, the other
> would automatically or with minimal effort pick up the slack...Which if
> the
> processes you mentioned would be the best?
> Thanx...Jon
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
|||Hi,
I am just curious on the difference between replication & log shipping. Is
the underlaying just triggers of SQL statements that done the
insert/delete/update ?
if i set up replication to rep every 2 minutes or continuously , is it any
difference with having log shipping (which i personally find it more diffcult
to setup then replication)
tks & rdgs
Andrew J. Kelly wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
>As Mike stated that is what Mirroring is made for. But Log Shipping is also
>a viable alternative and is available now. It has a longer time to be up
>and running after a failover but that is configurable with how often you log
>ship.
>[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
|||There is quite a bit of difference between the two. Too much to go into here
but if you read up in BooksOnLine on each you will begin to see all the
features of both. But in a nut shell Log shipping utilizes a backup of the
log and applies all of the changes in the log on the log shipped server
exactly as they occurred on the original. Replication has many configurable
options to determine what gets replicated and how and uses a Log reader and
distributor database to forward the changes.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"maxzsim via droptable.com" <u14644@.uwe> wrote in message
news:58b3593a1e828@.uwe...
> Hi,
> I am just curious on the difference between replication & log shipping.
> Is
> the underlaying just triggers of SQL statements that done the
> insert/delete/update ?
> if i set up replication to rep every 2 minutes or continuously , is it
> any
> difference with having log shipping (which i personally find it more
> diffcult
> to setup then replication)
> tks & rdgs
>
> Andrew J. Kelly wrote:
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
server is running on Server 2003 standard. We would like to set up a second
SQL 2005 server and either do clustering or replication so that we would be
able to access our data in the event of a single server failure.
Which is the "better' solution and what are the minimum OS requirements for
both? In either case, each server will be running its own local disk array
that would contain the OS and the databaeses.
Thanx...Jon
Windows Clustering requires a shared disk array and all the equipment must
be on the Clustering Hardware Compatibility List. Replication does not
require any special hardware but is not usually used for DR although some
do. You might want to look at using Log shipping or even the new Database
Mirroring features. Both are documented in BooksOnLine.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:505EE799-B615-4220-96C5-F5A7EDE71F74@.microsoft.com...
> We have a SQL 2000 server that we are about to upgrade to SQL 2005. This
> server is running on Server 2003 standard. We would like to set up a
> second
> SQL 2005 server and either do clustering or replication so that we would
> be
> able to access our data in the event of a single server failure.
> Which is the "better' solution and what are the minimum OS requirements
> for
> both? In either case, each server will be running its own local disk array
> that would contain the OS and the databaeses.
> Thanx...Jon
|||"Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:505EE799-B615-4220-96C5-F5A7EDE71F74@.microsoft.com...
> We have a SQL 2000 server that we are about to upgrade to SQL 2005. This
> server is running on Server 2003 standard. We would like to set up a
> second
> SQL 2005 server and either do clustering or replication so that we would
> be
> able to access our data in the event of a single server failure.
> Which is the "better' solution and what are the minimum OS requirements
> for
> both? In either case, each server will be running its own local disk array
> that would contain the OS and the databaeses.
>
Well clustering is a shared-disk solution. Replication, Log Shipping and
Database Mirroring are all options, though.
David
|||Actually DB mirroring sounds like what we might need. We have a recent SQL
server crash and it's too critical a piece to not have some kind of DR
process in place. The more I read about clustering the more I am unsure that
this is the way I'd like to go. What we would like is for the data to be in
two places both running SQL Server and if one server goes down, the other
would automatically or with minimal effort pick up the slack...Which if the
processes you mentioned would be the best?
Thanx...Jon
"Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
> Windows Clustering requires a shared disk array and all the equipment must
> be on the Clustering Hardware Compatibility List. Replication does not
> require any special hardware but is not usually used for DR although some
> do. You might want to look at using Log shipping or even the new Database
> Mirroring features. Both are documented in BooksOnLine.
>
> --
> Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
>
> "Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:505EE799-B615-4220-96C5-F5A7EDE71F74@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Hi
That is DB Mirroring, available for SQL Server 2005 early 2006.
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/
"Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C3C5AE8-3A63-4DD3-AD76-A79E4C13969F@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Actually DB mirroring sounds like what we might need. We have a recent SQL
> server crash and it's too critical a piece to not have some kind of DR
> process in place. The more I read about clustering the more I am unsure
> that
> this is the way I'd like to go. What we would like is for the data to be
> in
> two places both running SQL Server and if one server goes down, the other
> would automatically or with minimal effort pick up the slack...Which if
> the
> processes you mentioned would be the best?
> Thanx...Jon
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
|||As Mike stated that is what Mirroring is made for. But Log Shipping is also
a viable alternative and is available now. It has a longer time to be up
and running after a failover but that is configurable with how often you log
ship.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Jon Yiesla" <JonYiesla@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C3C5AE8-3A63-4DD3-AD76-A79E4C13969F@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Actually DB mirroring sounds like what we might need. We have a recent SQL
> server crash and it's too critical a piece to not have some kind of DR
> process in place. The more I read about clustering the more I am unsure
> that
> this is the way I'd like to go. What we would like is for the data to be
> in
> two places both running SQL Server and if one server goes down, the other
> would automatically or with minimal effort pick up the slack...Which if
> the
> processes you mentioned would be the best?
> Thanx...Jon
> "Andrew J. Kelly" wrote:
|||Hi,
I am just curious on the difference between replication & log shipping. Is
the underlaying just triggers of SQL statements that done the
insert/delete/update ?
if i set up replication to rep every 2 minutes or continuously , is it any
difference with having log shipping (which i personally find it more diffcult
to setup then replication)
tks & rdgs
Andrew J. Kelly wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
>As Mike stated that is what Mirroring is made for. But Log Shipping is also
>a viable alternative and is available now. It has a longer time to be up
>and running after a failover but that is configurable with how often you log
>ship.
>[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
|||There is quite a bit of difference between the two. Too much to go into here
but if you read up in BooksOnLine on each you will begin to see all the
features of both. But in a nut shell Log shipping utilizes a backup of the
log and applies all of the changes in the log on the log shipped server
exactly as they occurred on the original. Replication has many configurable
options to determine what gets replicated and how and uses a Log reader and
distributor database to forward the changes.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"maxzsim via droptable.com" <u14644@.uwe> wrote in message
news:58b3593a1e828@.uwe...
> Hi,
> I am just curious on the difference between replication & log shipping.
> Is
> the underlaying just triggers of SQL statements that done the
> insert/delete/update ?
> if i set up replication to rep every 2 minutes or continuously , is it
> any
> difference with having log shipping (which i personally find it more
> diffcult
> to setup then replication)
> tks & rdgs
>
> Andrew J. Kelly wrote:
> --
> Message posted via http://www.droptable.com
Clustering Virtual vs Instance
I successfully installed a SQL Virtual Server and a SQL Instance on a
Clustered Environment. Is there a limitation as to the number of additional
Vitual or Instances I can add. Also, what would be considering best
practice? Virtual or Instance?
Thank You in Advance!
Drake Teran
In a cluster, Virtual Server = Instance. YOu create a enw instance, you
create the Virtual Server to install it into. They are one and the same in
a cluster. You get up to 16 instances in a cluster.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Admiral" <admiral@.blackopsplatoon.com> wrote in message
news:u62RalJ5FHA.3388@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I successfully installed a SQL Virtual Server and a SQL Instance on a
>Clustered Environment. Is there a limitation as to the number of
>additional Vitual or Instances I can add. Also, what would be considering
>best practice? Virtual or Instance?
> Thank You in Advance!
> Drake Teran
>
|||When creating the Virtual Server/ Instance. I was able to call it a single
name "ExampleSQL", but the next instance created I had to name it
"ExampleSQL2/SQL". For all SQL vitual servers/instances creating from this
point forward require the "ExampleSQL2/SQL" convention?
Thanks in Advance
"Geoff N. Hiten" <sqlcraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e2qJJAK5FHA.1464@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> In a cluster, Virtual Server = Instance. YOu create a enw instance, you
> create the Virtual Server to install it into. They are one and the same
> in a cluster. You get up to 16 instances in a cluster.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Admiral" <admiral@.blackopsplatoon.com> wrote in message
> news:u62RalJ5FHA.3388@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
|||Correct. Each cluster can handle up to 16 instances - 1 default plus 15
named or 16 named (no default).
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinpub.com
"Admiral" <admiral@.blackopsplatoon.com> wrote in message
news:uYW4WbK5FHA.1420@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> When creating the Virtual Server/ Instance. I was able to call it a
> single name "ExampleSQL", but the next instance created I had to name it
> "ExampleSQL2/SQL". For all SQL vitual servers/instances creating from
> this point forward require the "ExampleSQL2/SQL" convention?
> Thanks in Advance
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <sqlcraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e2qJJAK5FHA.1464@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thank You!
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:uYZ5FlK5FHA.3544@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Correct. Each cluster can handle up to 16 instances - 1 default plus 15
> named or 16 named (no default).
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
> SQL Server MVP
> Columnist, SQL Server Professional
> Toronto, ON Canada
> www.pinpub.com
> "Admiral" <admiral@.blackopsplatoon.com> wrote in message
> news:uYW4WbK5FHA.1420@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
Clustered Environment. Is there a limitation as to the number of additional
Vitual or Instances I can add. Also, what would be considering best
practice? Virtual or Instance?
Thank You in Advance!
Drake Teran
In a cluster, Virtual Server = Instance. YOu create a enw instance, you
create the Virtual Server to install it into. They are one and the same in
a cluster. You get up to 16 instances in a cluster.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Admiral" <admiral@.blackopsplatoon.com> wrote in message
news:u62RalJ5FHA.3388@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>I successfully installed a SQL Virtual Server and a SQL Instance on a
>Clustered Environment. Is there a limitation as to the number of
>additional Vitual or Instances I can add. Also, what would be considering
>best practice? Virtual or Instance?
> Thank You in Advance!
> Drake Teran
>
|||When creating the Virtual Server/ Instance. I was able to call it a single
name "ExampleSQL", but the next instance created I had to name it
"ExampleSQL2/SQL". For all SQL vitual servers/instances creating from this
point forward require the "ExampleSQL2/SQL" convention?
Thanks in Advance
"Geoff N. Hiten" <sqlcraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e2qJJAK5FHA.1464@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> In a cluster, Virtual Server = Instance. YOu create a enw instance, you
> create the Virtual Server to install it into. They are one and the same
> in a cluster. You get up to 16 instances in a cluster.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Admiral" <admiral@.blackopsplatoon.com> wrote in message
> news:u62RalJ5FHA.3388@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
|||Correct. Each cluster can handle up to 16 instances - 1 default plus 15
named or 16 named (no default).
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinpub.com
"Admiral" <admiral@.blackopsplatoon.com> wrote in message
news:uYW4WbK5FHA.1420@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> When creating the Virtual Server/ Instance. I was able to call it a
> single name "ExampleSQL", but the next instance created I had to name it
> "ExampleSQL2/SQL". For all SQL vitual servers/instances creating from
> this point forward require the "ExampleSQL2/SQL" convention?
> Thanks in Advance
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <sqlcraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e2qJJAK5FHA.1464@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thank You!
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message
news:uYZ5FlK5FHA.3544@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Correct. Each cluster can handle up to 16 instances - 1 default plus 15
> named or 16 named (no default).
> --
> Tom
> ----
> Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
> SQL Server MVP
> Columnist, SQL Server Professional
> Toronto, ON Canada
> www.pinpub.com
> "Admiral" <admiral@.blackopsplatoon.com> wrote in message
> news:uYW4WbK5FHA.1420@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)