Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

6

The space actually used by a quorum disk amounts at most to a few kilobytes, not even megabytes. There is really no reason at all to go above the suggested size. That said, creating a LUN and a NTFS volume of a few megabytes in size would be impractical for several reasons; the most common size for quorum disks in my experience is 1 GB, and even that is ...


5

In order to cluster Hyper-V virtual machines, you need the VMs to be on a shared storage which can be accessed by all cluster nodes; since you are using an iSCSI SAN, this should already be your case. You need to set up the cluster and then configure the VMs as cluster resources. In order to do this, you'll need to shut down the VMs, but if they are already ...


5

Windows Clustering's full name is Windows Failover Clustering. It's not active/active database instances. It doesn't sound like it's what you're looking for. MSSQL server doesn't do sharding or any of that stuff. It "scales up" instead of "scaling out" so to speak.


5

The most generic method I can think of to do this would be to virtualise the middle-teir service in a hypervisor that supports high availability (such as VMWare vSphere). Of course, this is only easy if you: Have an existing virtual environment Have existing shared storage Have HA-compatible hardware Otherwise it's difficult and expensive, but it's at ...


4

cssh is supposed to tile the windows automatically. Try adding the following to ~/.csshrc (the manpage contains all the options): terminal_size = 80x24 console_position = +0+0 window_tiling = yes always_tile = yes


4

This should be possible. You will simply create a single-node cluster. When you're ready to create the second node, you'll expand the cluster via the Failover Cluster snap-in. There are a couple of things you should be mindful of: When adding the second node, Windows will try to get you to run the analyzer. If you do, it can potentially cause an ...


3

It's unlikely that you'd be able to re-use the Quorum disk for more than one cluster since each cluster will be trying to put its files in the same place. The Quorum drive doesn't need to be terribly large (at least 512MB according to this) Since it's just proof of concept, do they need to be separate clusters? You can have more than one SQL instance in a ...


3

Dynamic quorum doesn't work by changing the quorum type, it works by modifying the NodeWeight property on one or more nodes as required. For example, let's say I have a three node cluster running in Node Majority quorum mode. You would choose this mode as it gives the quorum an odd number of participating votes, which is required in order to make a ...


3

In my experience, this can't be done. RSAT is designed for its version of windows paired with its version of server OS.


3

Install the service on both nodes of the cluster. Create a new resource group and put the name and IP address in there. Add in a Generic Service and point it to the service you wish to cluster. Configure the services that need to access the service to point to the cluster name that you put in the resource group. I've done this for a number of non-cluster ...


3

Shared disk of some sort is required for the disks that the MSMQ data will be stored on. The cost of the SAN isn't the main issue -- it's rather the fact that the SAN becomes a single point of failure. SANs aren't really considered a single point of failure. They have redundant controllers, redundant paths from the server to the SAN, redundant ...


3

I'm gonna make this an official answer. This is a terrible idea. Don't even attempt to do it. I don't care that some guy thought that it might be a great idea what with all the new fangled cloud technology out there. What happens when you lose your internet connection? What happens when your internet connection bounces? What happens when your building ...


3

I suppose technically it would be possible. It would be a much better solution to purchase some VMware vSphere licenses and setup a vSphere Cluster so that you get the native HA which comes with VMware ESX.


3

This screams resource depletion of some kind. If this were a Linux host I'd be thinking, "this sounds like a boat load of IO-Wait." Check OS level performance monitors like mfinni pointed out. You have two areas that could be bottle-necking, and that's logical/physical disk performance, and network performance on the iSCSI network connection. PerfMon can ...


2

This tables about Features Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2008 R2 states the number of failover clustering nodes supported by Sandard Edition is 2, but for Enterprise its Operating system maximum (and Windows Server 2003 supports a maximum of 8 failover cluster nodes. Windows Server 2008 supports a maximum of 16 failover cluster nodes.)


2

Actually --> You don't get load balancing and could potentially have a performance degradation with more and more nodes. The hit wouldn't come straight away at day 1 necessarily (though that depends on how you are sharing out the shared storage and any potential performance concerns there) but you could potentially see a hit in a multi-instance clustering ...


2

First off I'd say you need to take a step back here and learn the difference between block and file storage. I'm not convinced that you truly understand the difference from the phrasing of your question. You say that you have an iSCSI target machine and mention ZFS. Is your iSCSI target system running Solaris/OpenSolaris/NexentaOS or BSD? If not then you ...


2

SQL Server failover involves running a primary server that owns the database with a backup server that is ready to own the database. At the moment of failover, the backup server takes ownership of the storage, replays the logs and then brings the database on line. That's followed by a period where the hot parts of the database are brought into memory as ...


2

The following article explains how to manually remove Exchange. ADSI edit is your friend. Specifically look under "Remove the Exchange Server 2003 server from Active Directory" http://support.microsoft.com/kb/833396


2

I believe you need to clean the old Exchange config from Active Directory. I found this article. Note - this is not for the faint of heart as it requires liberal use of ADSIEdit. Be careful and ensure AD is backed up BEFORE you start and KNOW your AD recovery password.


2

No there would not be a problem with this. The AD requirement is there so that the hosts in your cluster have a single authentication domain, allowing them to correctly interact with each other. The AD version/mode can be higher or lower than the cluster members.


2

When you have a failover cluster with an even number of nodes, but your network isn't redundant, you still have a single point of failure. But it sounds like you've a fully redundant network setup, in that case, I would go with node majority. With node majority, your failover cluster will at least still be available even if the SAN appliances completely ...


2

tempdb is disposable and rebuilt on restart anyway. I'd try moving it to the local disks and see what happens. You shouldn't need to add them as a resource. YMMV of course. User databases + master, msdb, model etc should be on the shared disks Edit: MS Connect. Not supported apparently... ...but some guy managed it anyway Like I said, YMMV


2

To enable DAC, you need to run the following SQL command against your server: sp_configure 'remote admin connections', 1; GO RECONFIGURE; GO If you can't connect to it to even run this though, you will most likely need to start your server in single-user mode (or possibly minimal configuration mode) and go from there. To do this, you stop your SQL Server, ...


2

A Hyper-V Failover Cluster on it's own does not provide any load balancing of the virtual machines. You're misunderstanding things a bit. The cluster you're referring to could/would probably not withstand the failure of 6 of the 7 nodes. The cluster could probably handle the failure of several nodes, but it could not withstand the failure of a majority of ...


2

The implications are that there is the potential for group policy, or other processes that rely on the OU structure in AD, to make non-uniform changes to cluster members. Best practices are to have them in the same OU, and it only takes a moment to correct, so I would ask your client to move them into the same OU. Also, Microsoft also supports Failover ...


2

In retrospect, I guess I should've known. The answer is in two parts, because, in my mind, there's planned failover and "real"/unplanned failover---and planned failover doesn't count. Planned failover Planned failover is actually just the Clustering system draining the node, then rebooting it for you. So when you directly reboot the node via RDP or "Stop ...


2

NLB uses port rules to determine routes to nodes. We set our NLB cluster up to route off-standard ports in addition to standard ports for web services (http/s) and set up NLB to always route one off-standard port to one node, then another off-standard port to another node. In IIS for each node, we added a host header file entry for that node's off-standard ...


2

A cluster IP is the virtual IP that represents your clustered service. Typically this is the IP assigned to your clustered service on your load balancer.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible