High Availability Upgrades

  • Comments posted to this topic are about the item High Availability Upgrades

  • I have read it somewhere that it will work with cluster only.

    And the cluster is windows 2008 cluster which is domain independent and can be configured as global domain.

    I might be wrong.....

    ----------
    Ashish

  • I have to say I don't know all of the details of all of the new features as of yet. However, for the common, basic SQL Server install that doesn't need to scale I really don't see any gotta have features in 2012. The one big difference is the cost will go up based on cores. We have fast tracked three systems to upgrade to SQL2008R2 and are in progress right now simply because of the price increase coming for SQL2012.

    Maybe I am wrong though.

  • Markus (3/2/2012)


    The one big difference is the cost will go up based on cores.

    That depends on the number of cores. They priced it so that if each proc has four cores then the price will be the same.

    Based on the fact that I can't count the number of SQL 2000 boxes we still have on two hands I don't think we'll be making much of a drive for SQL 2012. I'll request that we upgrade our monitoring box to it and outside of that I don't expect to see many others until vendors start supporting it when we upgrade. And even then we may only upgrade certain servers.

  • One we have right now has 16 cores..... now THAT would be expensive!

  • It's a feature that I am looking forward to, but am I in a big rush to get to it? No. We have a pretty good high-availbility setup now, so this is not a feature I see as something I am waiting for with abated breath. Actually, I am more interested in going to 2012 for the "Contained Databases' feature than the "AlwaysOn" feature because remapping logins/users and permissions has always been a pain when moving databases around from server to server, or from Production to DEV, or to QA in the past. Also, I am looking forward to the "Restore Database with Timeline" feature as well. These two features are much more important to me right now than "AlwaysOn". 😀

    "Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"

  • Just sharing whatever I read online about 2012 features:-

    1) contained database

    Need to enable this at server level using sp_configure

    This database as of now have option to be configured with 2 option. Null and partial. Third option "Full" will be in future release.

    2) restore database with timeline

    This one is going to be best as now its fully graphical and you can scroll till the point you want to restore.

    3) alwayson

    Cant remember the exact word I read somewhere, but the meaning was somewhat similar to this:-

    Alwayson is the first child of successful marriage of Cluster and mirroring.

    4) one good t-sql functionality I liked is "Format". this is really helpful in converting the datetime to local format.

    5) Server Level role can be created but the permissions are pre-defined which you have to select from the list. You cant have your own customized permission in this customized role.

    I am sure there are lots. Just sharing whatever I know about 2012 and trying to correct and add more in my 2012 KB.

    ----------
    Ashish

  • Markus (3/2/2012)


    One we have right now has 16 cores..... now THAT would be expensive!

    16 cores meaning a 4x4 or are they more dense than quad cores? If you have more than 4 cores/CPU, then definitely fast track those upgrades now. I think if you do the math, you'll find that you will be much better off.

  • TravisDBA (3/2/2012)


    ...

    Actually, I am more interested in going to 2012 for the "Contained Databases' feature than the "AlwaysOn" feature because remapping logins/users and permissions has always been a pain when moving databases around from server to server, or from Production to DEV, or to QA in the past.

    Contained databases look good, but they're only partially working. The user thing should be better, though I'm not sure I'd pay for an upgrade for that.

  • The thing I'm most looking forward to with contained DBs is mirroring. I'm worried that we'll hit a failover and a SQL job will have been updated on one server but not the other. I'm not as concerned about users since all requests should go through the DBA team and we can sync the SIDs but we have vendors and app owners that maintain their own jobs.

  • Steve Jones - SSC Editor (3/2/2012)


    TravisDBA (3/2/2012)


    ...

    Actually, I am more interested in going to 2012 for the "Contained Databases' feature than the "AlwaysOn" feature because remapping logins/users and permissions has always been a pain when moving databases around from server to server, or from Production to DEV, or to QA in the past.

    Contained databases look good, but they're only partially working. The user thing should be better, though I'm not sure I'd pay for an upgrade for that.

    I won't have to pay. My company will go to it anyway simply because it is a new SQL version available and they like to keep up with the technology. They are not concerned with the cost. 😀

    "Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"

  • Always On is a pretty strong incentive for us, but we're pushing the business value of Power View used with PowerPivot in Sharepoint to justify buying some SQL 2012 licenses soon.

    Our decision is complicated by the fact that most of the interesting new features are only available in Enterprise Edition. We've managed to get by with mostly Standard Edition, but the new stuff might get us to move up, at least for some servers. Our budget is going to take a hit, though.

    Greg

  • "SQL Server 2012 will be released soon. I have no idea of the exact date . . ."

    Steve, SQLS 2012 has been released - it is running on 200,000 servers of Azure, check the attached screenshot.

    It is just not generally available yet.

  • That AlwaysOn feature is something I've been looking at as soon as 2012 was announced. The licensing is the only issue I'm worried about because our SQL VMs are already 8 cores each and are expected to be 12 cores each soon (and I have 3 of them). With that said we're already on track to test our product with it as soon as it is general release.

  • and if anyone want to read about 2012 then Free ebook: Introducing Microsoft SQL Server 2012 (second DRAFT preview) is available here

    http://blogs.msdn.com/b/microsoft_press/archive/2012/01/31/free-ebook-introducing-microsoft-sql-server-2012-second-draft-preview.aspx

    ----------
    Ashish

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)

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