2-node cluster, multiple SQL instances

  • lanky_doodle

    SSCrazy

    Points: 2172

    Hi,

    What are the best practices/guidelines for this? Currently have a 2-node WSFC running a single SQL instance, but customer wants to install a 2nd SQL instance into the existing WSFC.

    Can all the existing resources be used (disk etc.) in the same way for a non-clustered, multiple SQL instance environment? I.e. can I just point the new instance to the existing disks for databases, logs, etc. that are being used for the other instance?

    This article suggests you need a WSFC group per cluster instance?! "You must have one WSFC group for each failover cluster instance you want to configure."

    Thanks

  • Chris Harshman

    SSC-Forever

    Points: 41976

    The disks would be considered a resource of the cluster, so a separate non-clustered instance or a separate cluster would need separate disk space.  Were they trying to setup an "active-active" type situation where each node hosts an active instance or just trying to share the same active node with multiple instances?

  • lanky_doodle

    SSCrazy

    Points: 2172

    Thanks for the reply.

    This is an active-passive setup, so I'd say that's "share the same active node with multiple instances?"

    When you say "a separate cluster would need separate disk space" are you referring to a WSFC when saying "cluster", or a SQL cluster? I can provision more storage to the existing WSFC nodes to add more SQL clustered instances a lot more easily than creating new VMs and having to create a whole other WSFC... They have another 3 instances to bring online!

    PS: this is SQL Standard, so can't use AGs

    • This reply was modified 4 weeks, 1 day ago by  lanky_doodle.
  • Chris Harshman

    SSC-Forever

    Points: 41976

    Sorry for not getting back to this sooner, yes the disks are a resource of the SQL Server role.  I'm still trying to decipher your environment and setup though.  If you only have 2 nodes in the WSFC, then it seems possible that the SQL Server role for one of your five instances could end up being hosted on a different node.  This sounds more like a Multi-Instance Failover Cluster which people consider "active-active" configuration.

    What is the problem you are trying to solve by having so many instances?

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply