Collation error after OS Upgrade

We have a server which we needed to upgrade the OS on it from NT 4 Server to Windows 2000 Server.

As the system disks are seperate from the data disks. We did a fresh install of Windows, then installed SQL Server, applied service pack version 3, and then restored the master database.

From Query Analyser everything appears fine. I can query all the databases and tables, see them all, the web applications talk the database fine so all the users have recreated OK.

However ... if we try and look at the database through management console we get the following error.

A connection could not be established to ...

Reason: Cannot resolve collation conflict for like operation..

This happends logged in locally to the machine as administrator as well as connecting remotely. Does anybody have any idea what is happening?A little more info - I have run a trace to see what happens when enterprise manager connects, and the last thing it tries to run (which generates the collation error) is:

exec sp_MSdbuserpriv N'ver'|||You either have to support all collations or force your clients to reinstall SQL Server with the collation you chose.|||I am sorry but I don't understand what you mean by this?

Originally posted by Satya
You either have to support all collations or force your clients to reinstall SQL Server with the collation you chose.|||Even more info:

Looking at the query and playing a bit the following query if I run the following query against the master database, I get the "Cannot resolve collation conflict for like operation"

declare @.mode nvarchar(10)
set @.mode = N'ver'

if lower(@.mode) like N'serv%'
select 1 as result

NB if this run against another database (on the same server) it runs fine.

HELP!|||What is the default collation choose when you installed SQL Server?|||Unfortunately I didn't run the install - I asked the person running it to take the default collation which was offered.

Originally posted by Satya
What is the default collation choose when you installed SQL Server?|||You can run SERVERPROPERTY (Collation) to get it.|||Thanks for that:

The server collation is set to: Lation1_General_CI_AS
The master database collation is set to: SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS

I guess this is the root of the problem. Is there anyway I can change the server default collation without re-installing SQL Server?sqlsql

Collation difference between SQL 6.5 server and SQL 2000 server

Hello,
We are facing the following problem:
We have installed SQL 6.5 server Enterprise edition on Windows 2000
Advanced server. On this system, in the regional settings, the Locale
is Japanese and in Office 2003 Language settings also, we have added
Japanese.
We have another system with Windows 2000 server on which we have
installed SQL 2000 server Enterprise edition with SP4. On this system,
in the regional settings, the Locale is Japanese and in Office 2003
Language settings also, we have added Japanese.

>From the front end VB code, a query is formed which contains Japanese
value. This works in the SQL 6.5 environment but does not work in the
SQL 2000 environment. If we directly execute the query in SQL 2000
server, it is returning the row. But the VB front end is not
recognizing the row.
The query is like this:
SELECT * FROM Tstar_Currency WHERE Currency =3D N'=C6=CE=DD'
This query works when the VB client connects to the SQL 6.5 server and
the front end fetches one row. But when the VB client connects to SQL
2000 server, the front end is not fetching any row. However, if we
directly execute this in query analyzer in SQL 2000 server, it returns
one row.
Any idea why this is happening? What collation setting should we give
in the SQL 2000 server? Do we need to do anything in the front end
application?
Any help will be greatly appreciated. This is very urgent. Please also
mail to ravi.meenakshi@.gmail.com
Thanks!I would sugest running the VB app in debug mode and see what happens when
the VB app issues the select statment. In addition at the same time you may
open Profiler.
The collation you are using in sql 6.5 works well for you so I would try to
keep the same collation with sql 2000.
Be aware that with sql2000 you have collation at three levels: server,
database and columns.
Verify that you have installed sql 2000 with the desired collation.
Yaniv
--
<Ravi.Meenakshi@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1135763223.233337.224300@.g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Hello,
We are facing the following problem:
We have installed SQL 6.5 server Enterprise edition on Windows 2000
Advanced server. On this system, in the regional settings, the Locale
is Japanese and in Office 2003 Language settings also, we have added
Japanese.
We have another system with Windows 2000 server on which we have
installed SQL 2000 server Enterprise edition with SP4. On this system,
in the regional settings, the Locale is Japanese and in Office 2003
Language settings also, we have added Japanese.

>From the front end VB code, a query is formed which contains Japanese
value. This works in the SQL 6.5 environment but does not work in the
SQL 2000 environment. If we directly execute the query in SQL 2000
server, it is returning the row. But the VB front end is not
recognizing the row.
The query is like this:
SELECT * FROM Tstar_Currency WHERE Currency = N''
This query works when the VB client connects to the SQL 6.5 server and
the front end fetches one row. But when the VB client connects to SQL
2000 server, the front end is not fetching any row. However, if we
directly execute this in query analyzer in SQL 2000 server, it returns
one row.
Any idea why this is happening? What collation setting should we give
in the SQL 2000 server? Do we need to do anything in the front end
application?
Any help will be greatly appreciated. This is very urgent. Please also
mail to ravi.meenakshi@.gmail.com
Thanks!|||(Ravi.Meenakshi@.gmail.com) writes:
> We have installed SQL 6.5 server Enterprise edition on Windows 2000
> Advanced server. On this system, in the regional settings, the Locale
> is Japanese and in Office 2003 Language settings also, we have added
> Japanese.
> We have another system with Windows 2000 server on which we have
> installed SQL 2000 server Enterprise edition with SP4. On this system,
> in the regional settings, the Locale is Japanese and in Office 2003
> Language settings also, we have added Japanese.
>
> value. This works in the SQL 6.5 environment but does not work in the
> SQL 2000 environment. If we directly execute the query in SQL 2000
> server, it is returning the row. But the VB front end is not
> recognizing the row.
> The query is like this:
> SELECT * FROM Tstar_Currency WHERE Currency = N''
> This query works when the VB client connects to the SQL 6.5 server and
> the front end fetches one row. But when the VB client connects to SQL
> 2000 server, the front end is not fetching any row. However, if we
> directly execute this in query analyzer in SQL 2000 server, it returns
> one row.
Wait a minute, that query does not even have legal syntax for
SQL 6.5. Is the N really there?
What does sp_helpsort return on SQL 6.5?
On SQL 2000, what does SELECT Serverproperty('Collation') return?
If you run sp_help on Tstar_Currency on SQL 2000, which is the
data type, and which is the collation for that column?
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|||The N is there in the query only in SQL 2000, not in 6.5
The data type of Currency column in Tstar_Currency in SQL 6.5 is
char(20) and in SQL 2000 is nchar(20)
The collation of this column in SQL 2000 is Japanese_CI_AS
The only change in the VB code is the inclusion of N before the
Japanese value.
Any clues on how to solve the problem?|||I ran profiler for the 2000 environment. In the query I first saw in
the profiler, I saw boxes. Then I changed the font in the Profiler to
Japanese. Then the query displayed like this:
SELECT MSCICode FROM Tstar_Currency WHERE Currency =3D N'=EF=BE=86=EF=BE=8E=
=EF=BE=9D'
When I executed this query in query analyzer, it did not return any
rows.
Please note that the client PC on which the VB application is running,
the regional settings is changed to Japanese.
I can't understand why the Japanese value was not passed correctly from
VB to SQL Server.
Any clues?|||(Ravi.Meenakshi@.gmail.com) writes:
> The N is there in the query only in SQL 2000, not in 6.5
> The data type of Currency column in Tstar_Currency in SQL 6.5 is
> char(20) and in SQL 2000 is nchar(20)
> The collation of this column in SQL 2000 is Japanese_CI_AS
> The only change in the VB code is the inclusion of N before the
> Japanese value.
> Any clues on how to solve the problem?
I asked you these questions:
What does sp_helpsort return on SQL 6.5?
On SQL 2000, what does SELECT Serverproperty('Collation') return?
It's difficult to give clues, if I don't get any.
But it does sound funny to me that the sole difference should be the
addition of the N. If the characters in the string are Unicode, it would
not work on 6.5. Since it works on 6.5, I suspect that the string is in
some other character set. In which case it will of course not work with
a Unicode column.
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|||The output of sp_helpsort in 65. is:
Character Set = 1, iso_1
ISO 8859-1 (Latin-1) - Western European 8-bit character set.
Sort Order = 52, nocase
Case-insensitive dictionary sort order for use with several We
stern-European languages including English, French, and German
. Uses the ISO 8859-1 character set.
The output of SELECT Serverproperty('Collation') in SQL 2000 is
SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
The collation setting of the SQL 2000 server is the default setting.
The collation for the database that the front end code is accessing is
Japanese_CI_AS|||(Ravi.Meenakshi@.gmail.com) writes:
> The output of sp_helpsort in 65. is:
> Character Set = 1, iso_1
> ISO 8859-1 (Latin-1) - Western European 8-bit character set.
> Sort Order = 52, nocase
> Case-insensitive dictionary sort order for use with several We
> stern-European languages including English, French, and German
> . Uses the ISO 8859-1 character set.
> The output of SELECT Serverproperty('Collation') in SQL 2000 is
It sounds like a miracle if you get Japanese text correcly into that
server. Or at least a great deal of luck.

> SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
> The collation setting of the SQL 2000 server is the default setting.
> The collation for the database that the front end code is accessing is
> Japanese_CI_AS
I have not really managed to fully understand at what collation the
client APIs looks at when they convert data between character sets,
but I suspect that's the server collation. In which case Japanese text
that is the ANSI code page, will be mangled before it's sent to SQL Server.
Apparently you are building a an entire command string in VB. Try to use
parameterised command instead, as then you can declare the type of the
parameter.
You could also try to install an instance of SQL 2000 that has
Japanese_CI_AS as its server collation.
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.mspxsqlsql

CmdExec jobs run in non-admin Windows accounts

I am attempting to tighten the security of our MSSQL environment in a number
of ways and one of these is to run scheduled CmdExec jobs via a non-admin
Windows account. Alas, I cannot get this to work correctly.
I created a credential "abc_job" based on a non-admin Windows domain account
"dom01\abc" in a global group.
I assigned permission for "log on as a batch job" to the global group.
I created a proxy "abc_prox", assigned it to the credential and set it to
active for CmdExec.
I gave access to the proxy for a MSSQL account "xyz" (non sysadmin).
I created a test job and gave ownership of the job to the "xyz" MSSQL account.
The job only has one step and the step runs as proxy "abc_prox".
The job is one line: g:\hjk\test.bat > g:\hjk\test.out
The batch file consists of 5 lines:
chdir /D g:\hjk
whoami
net time
ping gh234test
dir
When I start the job, only the chdir and dir commands succeed. The other 3
lines return "access is denied". However when I remote term to the SQL
Server machine as "dom01\abc" and run the batch file in a command prompt
window it succeeds.
What am I missing?forgot to mention, I also assigned the "xyz" MSSQL account to the
SQLAgentUserRole in the msdb database.

CmdExec jobs run in non-admin Windows accounts

I am attempting to tighten the security of our MSSQL environment in a number
of ways and one of these is to run scheduled CmdExec jobs via a non-admin
Windows account. Alas, I cannot get this to work correctly.
I created a credential "abc_job" based on a non-admin Windows domain account
"dom01\abc" in a global group.
I assigned permission for "log on as a batch job" to the global group.
I created a proxy "abc_prox", assigned it to the credential and set it to
active for CmdExec.
I gave access to the proxy for a MSSQL account "xyz" (non sysadmin).
I created a test job and gave ownership of the job to the "xyz" MSSQL accoun
t.
The job only has one step and the step runs as proxy "abc_prox".
The job is one line: g:\hjk\test.bat > g:\hjk\test.out
The batch file consists of 5 lines:
chdir /D g:\hjk
whoami
net time
ping gh234test
dir
When I start the job, only the chdir and dir commands succeed. The other 3
lines return "access is denied". However when I remote term to the SQL
Server machine as "dom01\abc" and run the batch file in a command prompt
window it succeeds.
What am I missing?forgot to mention, I also assigned the "xyz" MSSQL account to the
SQLAgentUserRole in the msdb database.

CmdExec jobs run in non-admin Windows accounts

I am attempting to tighten the security of our MSSQL environment in a number
of ways and one of these is to run scheduled CmdExec jobs via a non-admin
Windows account. Alas, I cannot get this to work correctly.
I created a credential "abc_job" based on a non-admin Windows domain account
"dom01\abc" in a global group.
I assigned permission for "log on as a batch job" to the global group.
I created a proxy "abc_prox", assigned it to the credential and set it to
active for CmdExec.
I gave access to the proxy for a MSSQL account "xyz" (non sysadmin).
I created a test job and gave ownership of the job to the "xyz" MSSQL account.
The job only has one step and the step runs as proxy "abc_prox".
The job is one line: g:\hjk\test.bat > g:\hjk\test.out
The batch file consists of 5 lines:
chdir /D g:\hjk
whoami
net time
ping gh234test
dir
When I start the job, only the chdir and dir commands succeed. The other 3
lines return "access is denied". However when I remote term to the SQL
Server machine as "dom01\abc" and run the batch file in a command prompt
window it succeeds.
What am I missing?
forgot to mention, I also assigned the "xyz" MSSQL account to the
SQLAgentUserRole in the msdb database.

Cmd shell proxy

I am attempting to execute xp_cmdshell with a non-sysadmin db login. I have created a Windows account and the associated proxy account in SQL Server. I have verified SQL Server is showing the proxy account credentials. I am still getting the following error. What am I missing? Guidance is very appreciated.

Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server error '80040e09'

EXECUTE permission denied on object 'xp_cmdshell', database 'mssqlsystemresource', schema 'sys'.

Try granting execute permission on xp_cmdshell to the non-sysadmin login

use master;

GRANT EXECUTE on xp_cmdshell to [non-sysadmin_login]

Clustering under Windows 98SE/XP

Is there a way to setup a cluster on a network running Windows 98SE and
Windows XP? We've succeeded at doing things like distributing our files
among other computers in the network and mapping their drives for use with
built in search functions but now we want to tap processor power of the
other computes for running applications on any networked machine. We've seen
this done using Linux but we are loyal Windows fans and do not want to make
the move unless we have no other choice.
VMWare or Virtual Server 2005 will allow you to build a test cluster!
Cheers,
Rodney R. Fournier
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
ClusterHelp.com is a Microsoft Certified Gold Partner
"Tom" <trendor@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44120704$0$3755$39cecf19@.news.twtelecom.net.. .
> Is there a way to setup a cluster on a network running Windows 98SE and
> Windows XP? We've succeeded at doing things like distributing our files
> among other computers in the network and mapping their drives for use with
> built in search functions but now we want to tap processor power of the
> other computes for running applications on any networked machine. We've
> seen this done using Linux but we are loyal Windows fans and do not want
> to make the move unless we have no other choice.
>

Clustering SQL servers

I posted this in the Windows Server 2003 General
Discussions then realized it belongs here...
Can someone tell me if there are any issues with
installing Windows 2003 Server SQL clusters on two
different server hardware configurations? Example:
Cluster 1 running on a Dell 2650 and Cluster 2 running on
a Dell 2450.
The goal is to setup with current platform and then
upgrade the 2450 to a 2650 in 3 to 6 months.
Currently both or our cluster servers are running on two
Dell 2450 servers connected to a SAN providing disk space
for our Mail Servers mail store. I need to add MSSQL to
each of these clusters and continue to have the clusters
mananging the SAN for the mail server store as well as
giving me the ability to cluster the SQL servers.
We would like to upgrade the Dells to 2650's but at this
time I only have one 2650 to do this with. I should have
a second one in 3 to 6 months. I am not sure on what the
issues might be if I have two different hardware platforms.
Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.
Clustering does not require exact duplicate hardware to function. With that
said, to be fully supported by Microsoft it just needs to be on this list:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/cat...5-23e9cd3ae95b
(which is coming up blank for me at the moment...)
Other then that, you are good to go!
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
"Tony" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4f6001c473df$a28409c0$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
> I posted this in the Windows Server 2003 General
> Discussions then realized it belongs here...
> Can someone tell me if there are any issues with
> installing Windows 2003 Server SQL clusters on two
> different server hardware configurations? Example:
> Cluster 1 running on a Dell 2650 and Cluster 2 running on
> a Dell 2450.
> The goal is to setup with current platform and then
> upgrade the 2450 to a 2650 in 3 to 6 months.
> Currently both or our cluster servers are running on two
> Dell 2450 servers connected to a SAN providing disk space
> for our Mail Servers mail store. I need to add MSSQL to
> each of these clusters and continue to have the clusters
> mananging the SAN for the mail server store as well as
> giving me the ability to cluster the SQL servers.
> We would like to upgrade the Dells to 2650's but at this
> time I only have one 2650 to do this with. I should have
> a second one in 3 to 6 months. I am not sure on what the
> issues might be if I have two different hardware platforms.
> Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.
>
|||Thank you very much,
A check on the site confirms equipment is good to go.
Tony

>--Original Message--
>Clustering does not require exact duplicate hardware to
function. With that
>said, to be fully supported by Microsoft it just needs to
be on this list:
>http://www.microsoft.com/windows/cat...ver/default.as
px?xslt=categoryproduct&subid=22&pgn=8b712458-b91c-4a7d-
8695-23e9cd3ae95b
>(which is coming up blank for me at the moment...)
>Other then that, you are good to go!
>Cheers,
>Rod
>MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
>http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
>"Tony" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message[vbcol=seagreen]
>news:4f6001c473df$a28409c0$a501280a@.phx.gbl...
on[vbcol=seagreen]
space[vbcol=seagreen]
have[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
platforms.
>
>.
>
|||If you have a certified cluster solution then you are good to install SQL Server 2000 virtual server.
Additional Information:
How to locate qualified cluster solutions for Windows
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=828262
Cluster Support Policy
Microsoft's Cluster support policy is explained in these articles: Please read these carefully for the official support policy of
Cluster (General): http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;309395
Cluster (SQL): http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;327518
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 SQL

Are there any major issues in clustering SQL 2000 on a Windows 2003 cluster?
Will with is also be fine for SQL 2005 on a Windows 2003 cluster?
No major issues. But take a read of these articles:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888121
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301520
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/327270
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815431
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301600
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/872931
Linchi
"Peter Downes" <pjtdownes@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OQH5msk4EHA.3840@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Are there any major issues in clustering SQL 2000 on a Windows 2003
cluster?
> Will with is also be fine for SQL 2005 on a Windows 2003 cluster?
>
|||Are there huge performance benfits in clustering SQL? Would a second
identical server in a cluster double the performance?
"Linchi Shea" <linchi_shea@.NOSPAM.ml.com> wrote in message
news:ODmm5Rl4EHA.524@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> No major issues. But take a read of these articles:
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888121
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301520
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/327270
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815431
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301600
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/872931
> Linchi
> "Peter Downes" <pjtdownes@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OQH5msk4EHA.3840@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> cluster?
>
|||I would add that you need to do 817064 BEFORE 301600
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"Linchi Shea" <linchi_shea@.NOSPAM.ml.com> wrote in message
news:ODmm5Rl4EHA.524@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> No major issues. But take a read of these articles:
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888121
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301520
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/327270
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815431
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301600
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/872931
> Linchi
> "Peter Downes" <pjtdownes@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OQH5msk4EHA.3840@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> cluster?
>
|||A database; or an instance of SQL for that matter, will only run on one
server at a time - clustered or not. You can not load balance SQL databases
across servers.
The benefit to clustering SQL is High Availability. Oh, and its really cool.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"Peter Downes" <pjtdownes@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%237I81Xl4EHA.1120@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Are there huge performance benfits in clustering SQL? Would a second
> identical server in a cluster double the performance?
> "Linchi Shea" <linchi_shea@.NOSPAM.ml.com> wrote in message
> news:ODmm5Rl4EHA.524@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
|||Thanks for the advice!
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:e1u6mbl4EHA.2624@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> I would add that you need to do 817064 BEFORE 301600
> Cheers,
> Rod
> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
> http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
> http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
> "Linchi Shea" <linchi_shea@.NOSPAM.ml.com> wrote in message
> news:ODmm5Rl4EHA.524@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>

Clustering Reporting Services

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

Clustering failure on install

Hi,

Where can I post issues with SQL 2005 clustering. Is there any prereq that needs to be followed before installing SQL 2005 on a windows cluster?

Thanks

go here http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189910.aspx|||

You can certainly post here about any clustering issues you may encounter. The SQL Server 2005 Failover Clustering whitepaper will be released soon (and has full install instructions with screen captures). As far as prereqs, the link that was provided is good. But make sure that your Windows level cluster is rock solid and tested before installing SQL Server. The security is a bit different with SQL Server 2005 failover clustering, so pay attention to that.

Other than that, the install itself is straightforward. No real gotchas there except all nodes do not get the full compliment of client tools. If you install the client tools, they will only go on the server which initiated the install and you will need to install them on the other nodes. If you do not need the full compliment of admin tools on eachnode, then you don't have to worry about it.

If you want even more, the Apress book SQL Server 2005 High Availability is due out later this year. The book covers clustering both Windows (from a SQL perspective) & SQL - not just the SQL piece. It is spread out over two chapters and should be 250 - 300 pages for those two chapters alone.

|||adminup, did the article help?|||

Thanks It helped.

Th eonly other question is that before installing the SQL cluster do we need to configure the MSDTC or is there any prereq required after the Windows 2003 cluster is setup?

|||Yes, you should configure the clustered DTC prior to installing SQL Server as per http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301600/en-us and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/817064/en-us.|||

Hi Thanks while actually installing i get this error message I have checked the windows scheduling and it is started.

setup failed to start on the remote machine. Check the task scheduler event log on the reote machine

Why I am getting this error

|||If your other node or nodes do not have access to the CD-ROM or install point, that is a likely cause of this. It could also be a missed configuration step in the preparation, but it's most likely access to the install bits.|||

Thanks it was a share from a remote machine. Now the setup is fine I can SQL directories created on both the machine however it fails on database install there is no error log that corresponds to this.

I have enabled MSDTC and all the prereq but still the setup fails at the database creation points.

Any ideas?

Anup

|||sql setup log might give some clues as why it fails.|||

As OJ says, the logs should be telling and are VERY descriptive in SQL Server 2005.What part of the DB install does it choke on?

|||Thanks I figured it out it was probably a share from network drive to MSDTC service accont which was causing this but all well now set up completed thanks for all the help|||

I had the similar error on 64 bit STD edition installation of default instance , with another named instance already installed without any issues.I had to go ask the Task manager to interact with desktop on but the servers and restart the tast manger service in both. I am still not sure why does the TM needs to interact with desktop on the other (non installation passive node ).

Clustering failure on install

Hi,

Where can I post issues with SQL 2005 clustering. Is there any prereq that needs to be followed before installing SQL 2005 on a windows cluster?

Thanks

go here http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189910.aspx|||

You can certainly post here about any clustering issues you may encounter. The SQL Server 2005 Failover Clustering whitepaper will be released soon (and has full install instructions with screen captures). As far as prereqs, the link that was provided is good. But make sure that your Windows level cluster is rock solid and tested before installing SQL Server. The security is a bit different with SQL Server 2005 failover clustering, so pay attention to that.

Other than that, the install itself is straightforward. No real gotchas there except all nodes do not get the full compliment of client tools. If you install the client tools, they will only go on the server which initiated the install and you will need to install them on the other nodes. If you do not need the full compliment of admin tools on eachnode, then you don't have to worry about it.

If you want even more, the Apress book SQL Server 2005 High Availability is due out later this year. The book covers clustering both Windows (from a SQL perspective) & SQL - not just the SQL piece. It is spread out over two chapters and should be 250 - 300 pages for those two chapters alone.

|||adminup, did the article help?|||

Thanks It helped.

Th eonly other question is that before installing the SQL cluster do we need to configure the MSDTC or is there any prereq required after the Windows 2003 cluster is setup?

|||Yes, you should configure the clustered DTC prior to installing SQL Server as per http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301600/en-us and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/817064/en-us.|||

Hi Thanks while actually installing i get this error message I have checked the windows scheduling and it is started.

setup failed to start on the remote machine. Check the task scheduler event log on the reote machine

Why I am getting this error

|||If your other node or nodes do not have access to the CD-ROM or install point, that is a likely cause of this. It could also be a missed configuration step in the preparation, but it's most likely access to the install bits.|||

Thanks it was a share from a remote machine. Now the setup is fine I can SQL directories created on both the machine however it fails on database install there is no error log that corresponds to this.

I have enabled MSDTC and all the prereq but still the setup fails at the database creation points.

Any ideas?

Anup

|||sql setup log might give some clues as why it fails.|||

As OJ says, the logs should be telling and are VERY descriptive in SQL Server 2005.What part of the DB install does it choke on?

|||Thanks I figured it out it was probably a share from network drive to MSDTC service accont which was causing this but all well now set up completed thanks for all the help|||

I had the similar error on 64 bit STD edition installation of default instance , with another named instance already installed without any issues.I had to go ask the Task manager to interact with desktop on but the servers and restart the tast manger service in both. I am still not sure why does the TM needs to interact with desktop on the other (non installation passive node ).

clustering Exchange and SQL server using one SAN drive

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

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

clustering differences windows 2003

I found several great step by step articles on clustering in windows 2000.
What do I need to change in order to work with windows 2003? I read the
previous posts and it seems the setup is almost identical.
Thanks for your help
Andrew
Here is an articles on what's new:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...lustering.mspx
If you understand Windows 2000 clustering, you should be good to go.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"Andrew" <Andrew@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CCD04AA7-21C7-4650-B7DC-E254ABB19E33@.microsoft.com...
>I found several great step by step articles on clustering in windows 2000.
> What do I need to change in order to work with windows 2003? I read the
> previous posts and it seems the setup is almost identical.
> Thanks for your help
> Andrew
|||Hi Andrew,
Although most of the things are same for SQL Server 2000 Failover clustering on Win2K3, here are some things that are different/unsupported:
Installation of a Named Instance of SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server on a Windows 2003-Based Cluster Fails
http://support.microssoft.com/?id=815431
SQL Server 2000 Cluster Does Not Install on Windows Server 2003-Based Computers Where Terminal Services Is Installed
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=301520
Virtual SQL Server 2000 Installation Fails on Cluster That Has Eight Nodes
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=811054
SQL Server 2000 support for mounted volumes
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=819546
How to Configure Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator on a Windows Server 2003 Cluster
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=301600
How to enable Network DTC access in Windows Server 2003
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=817064
HTH,
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 concepts...

We have just setup two servers running a copy of SQL 2000 on Windows 2000
server. Each of these servers is running vendor software that interrracts
with the databases. One server is primary and one is backup. Clients only
interract with the vendor process on the servers and not the SQL directly.
Some general questions on SQL 2000 high availability options...
Does Active/Passive and Active/Active refer to clustering options that
require that the servers be clustered on the OS level? Is this the only
option that keeps the databases syncronized in real time?
Is replication a good method if the failover will be done manually?
Thanks!
Karl Albrecht
Active/Active and Active/Passive are obsolete concepts from SQL 7.0 when
each SQL instance had a primary owner host node and a partner owner node.
Under SQL 2000, all nodes are interchangable in a cluster. Some people
mistakenly use teh terms to refer to single and multiple instance SQL
clustering.
Clustering involves a single data store on a 'shared' storage system (SCSI
Array, SAN, etc. NOT NAS). Shared is not exactly correct since the cluster
software arbitrates ownership so that only one host node owns the
resource(s) at a time. Therefore, you have to have a working MSCS cluster
in order to create a SQL cluster.
Replication is not a good technique for creating a warm standby server.
Replication has VERY limited ability to handle schema changes without a
total resynch. It also does not replicate stored procedures or views.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Karl Albrecht" <karlman@.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:O8QGJUplEHA.2340@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We have just setup two servers running a copy of SQL 2000 on Windows 2000
> server. Each of these servers is running vendor software that interrracts
> with the databases. One server is primary and one is backup. Clients only
> interract with the vendor process on the servers and not the SQL directly.
>
> Some general questions on SQL 2000 high availability options...
> Does Active/Passive and Active/Active refer to clustering options that
> require that the servers be clustered on the OS level? Is this the only
> option that keeps the databases syncronized in real time?
> Is replication a good method if the failover will be done manually?
>
> Thanks!
> Karl Albrecht
>
|||Geoff, you can replicate stored procs and views.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:u%23O18vplEHA.3712@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
Active/Active and Active/Passive are obsolete concepts from SQL 7.0 when
each SQL instance had a primary owner host node and a partner owner node.
Under SQL 2000, all nodes are interchangable in a cluster. Some people
mistakenly use teh terms to refer to single and multiple instance SQL
clustering.
Clustering involves a single data store on a 'shared' storage system (SCSI
Array, SAN, etc. NOT NAS). Shared is not exactly correct since the cluster
software arbitrates ownership so that only one host node owns the
resource(s) at a time. Therefore, you have to have a working MSCS cluster
in order to create a SQL cluster.
Replication is not a good technique for creating a warm standby server.
Replication has VERY limited ability to handle schema changes without a
total resynch. It also does not replicate stored procedures or views.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Karl Albrecht" <karlman@.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:O8QGJUplEHA.2340@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We have just setup two servers running a copy of SQL 2000 on Windows 2000
> server. Each of these servers is running vendor software that interrracts
> with the databases. One server is primary and one is backup. Clients only
> interract with the vendor process on the servers and not the SQL directly.
>
> Some general questions on SQL 2000 high availability options...
> Does Active/Passive and Active/Active refer to clustering options that
> require that the servers be clustered on the OS level? Is this the only
> option that keeps the databases syncronized in real time?
> Is replication a good method if the failover will be done manually?
>
> Thanks!
> Karl Albrecht
>
|||> Clustering involves a single data store on a 'shared' storage system (SCSI
> Array, SAN, etc. NOT NAS).
Actually, you can cluster to a shared resource on a NAS. We have a NetApp
880 Filer and have been running SQL clusters quite nicely using Snapdrive
over Gig fiber for a couple of years using the procedures outlined at this
NetApp link:
http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3248.html#2.
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:u%23O18vplEHA.3712@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Active/Active and Active/Passive are obsolete concepts from SQL 7.0 when
> each SQL instance had a primary owner host node and a partner owner node.
> Under SQL 2000, all nodes are interchangable in a cluster. Some people
> mistakenly use teh terms to refer to single and multiple instance SQL
> clustering.
> Clustering involves a single data store on a 'shared' storage system (SCSI
> Array, SAN, etc. NOT NAS). Shared is not exactly correct since the
> cluster
> software arbitrates ownership so that only one host node owns the
> resource(s) at a time. Therefore, you have to have a working MSCS cluster
> in order to create a SQL cluster.
> Replication is not a good technique for creating a warm standby server.
> Replication has VERY limited ability to handle schema changes without a
> total resynch. It also does not replicate stored procedures or views.
>
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Karl Albrecht" <karlman@.pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:O8QGJUplEHA.2340@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>

Clustering , how to start ?

Dear Friends,

i'm using windows 2003 server on both computers

i wanted to practice clustering with sql 200/2005 [two nodes] but it asks for a quorum disk as a shared disk between the two clustered nodes, i didn't know what a quorum disk it, the internet when i searched for says that

a quorum disk should be either a scsi or fiber channel disk, i've never seen a scsi disk, i'll purchase it today, but what i'm confused about is, how will i connect one single scsi disk two two computers/nodes ? i mean does a scsi disk have a long cable to connect to and if yes, then where does the cable fit in on either of the nodes, or is it not physcially shared then if it's logical then how do i configure it.

pls reply soon,

regards, and thanks

Gurjit Singh

Moving this thread to: SQL Server Disaster Recovery and Availability|||

I'd suggest that you start by reading up on the basics of MSCS failover clustering.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms952401.aspx is one place to start, which describes clusters from an application standpoint.

Fundamentally, a cluster consists of 2 or more nodes on a common network, which can all physically access the same storage devices. An application (SQL in this case) is defined to the cluster as a newtork address and name by which that application will be known to the rest of the network, a set of one or more disks which are accessible to all nodes on which the application is allowed to run, and the application itself. When the application starts on a node, that node takes exclusive ownership of the resources defined for it, and starts the application.

This access to the storage is commonly via either SCSI or Fiberchannel. SCSI connections are physically a chain, with one or more "initiators" (the system controller), and one or more devices. There is a terminator on either end of this chain, or "bus".

In a cluster then, a typical layout for a SCSI-based storage system would be to have an extra SCSI adapter on each node, with the chain of disks between the two nodes, and the chain ending at each node. There are other topologies possible, but this is a common one. Note that this bus MUST be separate from the bus on which local system storage (the C: drive, etc.) is located.

Again, this is the 100,000 foot level. There are many many details that need to be gotten right. It's not rocket science, but you do need to pay attention to details. Some reading is definitely in order.

clustering

HI,
I am new to sql server clustering.
can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
Thanks in advance
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200705/1
Hi
"pardh via droptable.com" wrote:

> HI,
> I am new to sql server clustering.
> can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
> Thanks in advance
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200705/1
>
A SQL Server Cluster requires Microsoft Clustering Services. With SQL 2005
you can use database mirroring to attain high availablilty without the need
for a cluster. You can also use log shipping on SQL 2000/2005 as a way to
provide resilience.
John
|||Consider www.clusterhelp.com.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"pardh via droptable.com" <u8956@.uwe> wrote in message
news:71825e9196fad@.uwe...
HI,
I am new to sql server clustering.
can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
Thanks in advance
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200705/1

clustering

HI,
I am new to sql server clustering.
can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
Thanks in advance
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200705/1Hi
"pardh via SQLMonster.com" wrote:
> HI,
> I am new to sql server clustering.
> can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
> Thanks in advance
> --
> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200705/1
>
A SQL Server Cluster requires Microsoft Clustering Services. With SQL 2005
you can use database mirroring to attain high availablilty without the need
for a cluster. You can also use log shipping on SQL 2000/2005 as a way to
provide resilience.
John|||Consider www.clusterhelp.com.
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"pardh via SQLMonster.com" <u8956@.uwe> wrote in message
news:71825e9196fad@.uwe...
HI,
I am new to sql server clustering.
can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
Thanks in advance
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200705/1

clustering

HI,
I am new to sql server clustering.
can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
Thanks in advance
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200705/1Hi
"pardh via droptable.com" wrote:

> HI,
> I am new to sql server clustering.
> can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
> Thanks in advance
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200705/1
>
A SQL Server Cluster requires Microsoft Clustering Services. With SQL 2005
you can use database mirroring to attain high availablilty without the need
for a cluster. You can also use log shipping on SQL 2000/2005 as a way to
provide resilience.
John|||Consider www.clusterhelp.com.
Tom
----
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA, MCITP, MCTS
SQL Server MVP
Toronto, ON Canada
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Tom.Moreau
"pardh via droptable.com" <u8956@.uwe> wrote in message
news:71825e9196fad@.uwe...
HI,
I am new to sql server clustering.
can we setup sql clustering with out using windows cluster setup.
Thanks in advance
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200705/1

Clustering

Hi,

Where can I post issues with SQL 2005 clustering. Is there any prereq that needs to be followed before installing SQL 2005 on a windows cluster?

Thanks

go here http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189910.aspx|||

You can certainly post here about any clustering issues you may encounter. The SQL Server 2005 Failover Clustering whitepaper will be released soon (and has full install instructions with screen captures). As far as prereqs, the link that was provided is good. But make sure that your Windows level cluster is rock solid and tested before installing SQL Server. The security is a bit different with SQL Server 2005 failover clustering, so pay attention to that.

Other than that, the install itself is straightforward. No real gotchas there except all nodes do not get the full compliment of client tools. If you install the client tools, they will only go on the server which initiated the install and you will need to install them on the other nodes. If you do not need the full compliment of admin tools on eachnode, then you don't have to worry about it.

If you want even more, the Apress book SQL Server 2005 High Availability is due out later this year. The book covers clustering both Windows (from a SQL perspective) & SQL - not just the SQL piece. It is spread out over two chapters and should be 250 - 300 pages for those two chapters alone.

|||adminup, did the article help?|||

Thanks It helped.

Th eonly other question is that before installing the SQL cluster do we need to configure the MSDTC or is there any prereq required after the Windows 2003 cluster is setup?

|||Yes, you should configure the clustered DTC prior to installing SQL Server as per http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301600/en-us and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/817064/en-us.|||

Hi Thanks while actually installing i get this error message I have checked the windows scheduling and it is started.

setup failed to start on the remote machine. Check the task scheduler event log on the reote machine

Why I am getting this error

|||If your other node or nodes do not have access to the CD-ROM or install point, that is a likely cause of this. It could also be a missed configuration step in the preparation, but it's most likely access to the install bits.|||

Thanks it was a share from a remote machine. Now the setup is fine I can SQL directories created on both the machine however it fails on database install there is no error log that corresponds to this.

I have enabled MSDTC and all the prereq but still the setup fails at the database creation points.

Any ideas?

Anup

|||sql setup log might give some clues as why it fails.|||

As OJ says, the logs should be telling and are VERY descriptive in SQL Server 2005.What part of the DB install does it choke on?

|||Thanks I figured it out it was probably a share from network drive to MSDTC service accont which was causing this but all well now set up completed thanks for all the help|||

I had the similar error on 64 bit STD edition installation of default instance , with another named instance already installed without any issues.I had to go ask the Task manager to interact with desktop on but the servers and restart the tast manger service in both. I am still not sure why does the TM needs to interact with desktop on the other (non installation passive node ).