October 13, 2008 at 8:14 am
Hi there,
I have been reading up on muti-instance, but what I really need is multi-node. Let me explain.
We have two nodes configured in an active/pasive cluster, using a single named instance.
So we have:
Two node 'entsqlprod1' and 'entsqlprod2'
In a single named instance of 'entsqlprod'
With a virtual server of the same name.
We are putting in SharePoint and rather the buying an aditional two servers
thought that maybe we could purchase one and have active/active/passive in a
single named instance/virtual server.
The nodes are all identical servers (including proposed third node) and have HA with 64GB mem. They access an HA SAN which is mirrored to DR site using HP CA.
Can you tell me if adding another active node to our cluster is possible and it would work as required (if you could point to somewhere I can read from that would be great to).
Thanks in advance.
Adam Zacks-------------------------------------------Be Nice, Or Leave
October 13, 2008 at 8:47 am
What is it you are really trying to do?
You can add the sharepoint databases to your existing instance and leave the cluster exactly as it is. What is wrong with doing this?
October 13, 2008 at 8:55 am
Hey Michael,
The management are taking lead drom the consultants who have specifyed a two-node cluster (seperate). The IT department have suggested too extend our current cluster.
We are one of the only investment banks still expanding and so there is budget if it can be justifyed. Dont worry about the politics i can never figure them out.
Basically we have a single clustered named instance but they are suggesting to add a node and make it active/active/passive. I have read a lot but can only see solutions of 2, 4, 6, 8 servers with 2 or more instances meshed. Thats not what we want.
Is what we want even possible. You may have to talk down to me as Im not sure i wholy understand the concept.
Adam Zacks-------------------------------------------Be Nice, Or Leave
October 13, 2008 at 9:07 am
The MS Active/Active cluster solution is a bit misleading. Clustering is for HA only, it is not a load balancing solution.
In an Active/Active cluster, you need two instances of SQL. Each server is the Active node for one of the instances and the other server is the Passive node. So you really end up with two Active/Passive clusters. This can be done because each instance of SQL has it's own services. You cannot do this with SSIS - because only one instance can be run on a given server.
You could, have two servers each with their own named instance (or at least one of them with a named instance) and have these two servers be your Active nodes. Then, you could make the passive nodes for these two servers just a single additional server. It will work, but it seems like a waste - especially for Sharepoint which is not all that database intensive to begin with.
The configuration would basically be an attempt to ensure that a cluster node failure will not reduce the amount of available hardware. It just seems like overkill to me. It will probably be a lot of additional complexity - especially when you have to apply service packs. If you are going to waste money on a single additional server, why not buy 2 and just have two complete Active/Passive clusters?
October 13, 2008 at 9:11 am
That was my assumption as well. I just needed someone with more experience to sanity-check it for me.
Thank you for your quick reply and i'll let you know what they decide. Probably just a second active/passive cluster, they like wasting money.
Adam Zacks-------------------------------------------Be Nice, Or Leave
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply