Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I would like to know what the best way is failproof your SQL Server without using a failover cluster.

A failover cluster requires an enterprise server which is not an option

share|improve this question
Which version of SQL Server? – Massimo Mar 13 '12 at 19:32

Yes, Windows Failover Clustering does require Windows Enterprise edition or higher, but for SQL Server you need only SQL Server Standard Edition or higher. High availability (HA) solutions do have costs - and clustering needs shared storage - so my question is: perhaps the cost of being down is less than the cost of implementing and maintaining a HA solution? If so, that's absolutely fine.

Have you thought about log shipping? It's a more affordable solution but obviously is manual to invoke, and takes longer to come back up. Or database mirroring (marked for deprecation in a future version) offers HA and potentially DR too.

SQL Server 2012 also introduces a new HA solution, so you might want to have a look at that too.

share|improve this answer
thanks allot, i think database mirroring is a good option for me – Distracted Mar 13 '12 at 19:53

If failover clustering is not an option, then database mirroring is your next best bet:

Depending on the client software used to connect to your database server, client sessions may be able to automatically failover between mirrored databases:

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.