Hi everyone,
I have active-passive two node cluster server, it's already installed two
instances with associated two network names and IP addresses. Is there
possible to install the third instance in this cluster server, if give the
specific network name and IP address but no physical node 3?
Regards,
-Chen
Yes. The Active-Passive, Active-Active nomenclature is left over from SQL
7.0 and no longer accurately represents the clustering capabilities of SQL
Server 2000. The short version is you can have up to 16 instances on a
cluster, regardless of the number of nodes. You can choose which instances
should be on which nodes during normal operating conditions. You do have to
have a unique network name, IP address, and disk resource for each instance.
You also need to make sure you have enough physical resources (memory, CPU,
IO capacity) on each node to handle the work load, even during a failover
condition.
The correct current terms are single-instance and multiple-instance
clusters.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Chen" <Chen@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:430C357E-407A-4F73-8764-DDAFD3203DC2@.microsoft.com...
> Hi everyone,
> I have active-passive two node cluster server, it's already installed two
> instances with associated two network names and IP addresses. Is there
> possible to install the third instance in this cluster server, if give the
> specific network name and IP address but no physical node 3?
> Regards,
> -Chen
>
sql
Showing posts with label node. Show all posts
Showing posts with label node. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Friday, March 9, 2012
Is it best practice to put both the SQL & MSDTC groups on the same node?
In Rodney R. Fournier's blog it states:
"If MSDTC is used with SQL, you should ensure it is in it's own group,
on it's own disk resource. Lastly, Microsoft recommends to run the
MSDTC & SQL group on the same node, and that the MSDTC is brought
online first when the groups are moved."
("http://msmvps.com/clustering/archive/2004/10/25/16672.aspx").
I have a couple of questions about this but let first list my
assumptions.
Best:
For high performance, installing an MSDTC Resource to it in its own
group. This group should have its own disk and IP resources.
Good:
The next best method is to put the MSDTC resource in the cluster or
quorum group.
Worse:
Put the MSDTC resource in SQL Group.
What are the reasons for running the MSDTC & SQL group on the same
node, beyond these potential Win2003 cluster issues listed in:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821751/
?
If DTC is in the quorum group is it still best to put SQL and quorum
group on the same node?
Our system admin is religious about putting the SQL group on a
different node from the Quorum & DTC groups. Is there a best practice
here or a KB I can point to?
Are there any implications not having SQL dependent of MSDTC starting
first (MSDTC is brought online first when the groups are moved)
beyond the possibility of not being able to start a distributed
transaction?
Replies below...
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
"Sean" <spowell71@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126723915.556530.64310@.g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> In Rodney R. Fournier's blog it states:
> "If MSDTC is used with SQL, you should ensure it is in it's own group,
> on it's own disk resource. Lastly, Microsoft recommends to run the
> MSDTC & SQL group on the same node, and that the MSDTC is brought
> online first when the groups are moved."
> ("http://msmvps.com/clustering/archive/2004/10/25/16672.aspx").
> I have a couple of questions about this but let first list my
> assumptions.
> Best:
> For high performance, installing an MSDTC Resource to it in its own
> group. This group should have its own disk and IP resources.
>
Correct.
> Good:
> The next best method is to put the MSDTC resource in the cluster or
> quorum group.
>
Correct.
> Worse:
> Put the MSDTC resource in SQL Group.
>
Yuck! Correct.
> What are the reasons for running the MSDTC & SQL group on the same
> node, beyond these potential Win2003 cluster issues listed in:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821751/
> ?
>
Correct, pre SP1 for Windows Server 2003 MSDTC has issues! Lots of issues.
The Q is correct.
> If DTC is in the quorum group is it still best to put SQL and quorum
> group on the same node?
>
If you can, yes!
> Our system admin is religious about putting the SQL group on a
> different node from the Quorum & DTC groups. Is there a best practice
> here or a KB I can point to?
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706
Remember, SQL does not require MSDTC. You only need it if you application
will use it.
> Are there any implications not having SQL dependent of MSDTC starting
> first (MSDTC is brought online first when the groups are moved)
> beyond the possibility of not being able to start a distributed
> transaction?
>
Isn't that enough?
|||What are the arguments against these types of statements?
Having Quorum & DTC groups on a different node than the SQL group
a) has a load balancing effect, i.e. the SQL group will have the full
physical resources of the node.
b) enables the failover of SQL group happen be quicker cause Quorum &
DTC groups are already on the failover node.
|||http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706 pretty much
covers it.
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
"Sean" <spowell71@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126789871.591787.32620@.g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> What are the arguments against these types of statements?
> Having Quorum & DTC groups on a different node than the SQL group
> a) has a load balancing effect, i.e. the SQL group will have the full
> physical resources of the node.
> b) enables the failover of SQL group happen be quicker cause Quorum &
> DTC groups are already on the failover node.
>
|||I had this problem, MSTDC not available so I put MSDTC in the same group as
SQLServer AND made SQLServer dependant on MSDTC Works fine now.
Nik Marshall-Blank MCSD/MCDBA
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:%23sx340fuFHA.3188@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706 pretty much
> covers it.
> 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
>
> "Sean" <spowell71@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1126789871.591787.32620@.g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
>
"If MSDTC is used with SQL, you should ensure it is in it's own group,
on it's own disk resource. Lastly, Microsoft recommends to run the
MSDTC & SQL group on the same node, and that the MSDTC is brought
online first when the groups are moved."
("http://msmvps.com/clustering/archive/2004/10/25/16672.aspx").
I have a couple of questions about this but let first list my
assumptions.
Best:
For high performance, installing an MSDTC Resource to it in its own
group. This group should have its own disk and IP resources.
Good:
The next best method is to put the MSDTC resource in the cluster or
quorum group.
Worse:
Put the MSDTC resource in SQL Group.
What are the reasons for running the MSDTC & SQL group on the same
node, beyond these potential Win2003 cluster issues listed in:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821751/
?
If DTC is in the quorum group is it still best to put SQL and quorum
group on the same node?
Our system admin is religious about putting the SQL group on a
different node from the Quorum & DTC groups. Is there a best practice
here or a KB I can point to?
Are there any implications not having SQL dependent of MSDTC starting
first (MSDTC is brought online first when the groups are moved)
beyond the possibility of not being able to start a distributed
transaction?
Replies below...
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
"Sean" <spowell71@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126723915.556530.64310@.g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> In Rodney R. Fournier's blog it states:
> "If MSDTC is used with SQL, you should ensure it is in it's own group,
> on it's own disk resource. Lastly, Microsoft recommends to run the
> MSDTC & SQL group on the same node, and that the MSDTC is brought
> online first when the groups are moved."
> ("http://msmvps.com/clustering/archive/2004/10/25/16672.aspx").
> I have a couple of questions about this but let first list my
> assumptions.
> Best:
> For high performance, installing an MSDTC Resource to it in its own
> group. This group should have its own disk and IP resources.
>
Correct.
> Good:
> The next best method is to put the MSDTC resource in the cluster or
> quorum group.
>
Correct.
> Worse:
> Put the MSDTC resource in SQL Group.
>
Yuck! Correct.
> What are the reasons for running the MSDTC & SQL group on the same
> node, beyond these potential Win2003 cluster issues listed in:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/821751/
> ?
>
Correct, pre SP1 for Windows Server 2003 MSDTC has issues! Lots of issues.
The Q is correct.
> If DTC is in the quorum group is it still best to put SQL and quorum
> group on the same node?
>
If you can, yes!
> Our system admin is religious about putting the SQL group on a
> different node from the Quorum & DTC groups. Is there a best practice
> here or a KB I can point to?
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706
Remember, SQL does not require MSDTC. You only need it if you application
will use it.
> Are there any implications not having SQL dependent of MSDTC starting
> first (MSDTC is brought online first when the groups are moved)
> beyond the possibility of not being able to start a distributed
> transaction?
>
Isn't that enough?
|||What are the arguments against these types of statements?
Having Quorum & DTC groups on a different node than the SQL group
a) has a load balancing effect, i.e. the SQL group will have the full
physical resources of the node.
b) enables the failover of SQL group happen be quicker cause Quorum &
DTC groups are already on the failover node.
|||http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706 pretty much
covers it.
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
"Sean" <spowell71@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126789871.591787.32620@.g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> What are the arguments against these types of statements?
> Having Quorum & DTC groups on a different node than the SQL group
> a) has a load balancing effect, i.e. the SQL group will have the full
> physical resources of the node.
> b) enables the failover of SQL group happen be quicker cause Quorum &
> DTC groups are already on the failover node.
>
|||I had this problem, MSTDC not available so I put MSDTC in the same group as
SQLServer AND made SQLServer dependant on MSDTC Works fine now.
Nik Marshall-Blank MCSD/MCDBA
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:%23sx340fuFHA.3188@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;889706 pretty much
> covers it.
> 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
>
> "Sean" <spowell71@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1126789871.591787.32620@.g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)