SQL Server 2005 Consolidation

Question

SQL Server 2005 Consolidation

Laura-205946

SSChasing Mays

Points: 636
More actions
May 9, 2006 at 10:47 am

#168280

I currently planing to consolidate 30 SQL Server into an Active/Active Cluster 2005 64 bit design I am also trying to design a disaster recovery site also, what would u recommend for this?

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

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

mike mcneer Ten Centuries Points: 1189 More actions · Answer 1

For the DR part, I am currently looking at their form of log shipping(database mirroring now) for the DR site. As far as consolidating 30 servers onto 2005... whew.. personal opinion right now is 2005 is still not where it should be. I am waiting for a few more update/patch releases before I even think about it..

Laura-205946 SSChasing Mays Points: 636 More actions · Answer 2

Well I would agree about not moving until a year has passed. But when u have management on your back....

Does Active/Active sql 2005 64 bit work with Database Mirroring?

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736150 More actions · Answer 3

If you really need clustering, be sure that you benchmark your 30 servers and have enough hardware to support it. The clustering, unless you are geographically dispersed, won't give you DR.

You might check out mirroring and see if that is a better solution than consolidating onto a cluster. Or maybe use both in tandem to cluster locally and have a DR site with mirrors ready to go.

Laura-205946 SSChasing Mays Points: 636 More actions · Answer 4

Yes I am goimg to give a few different options: The hardware will be 64 bit hardware with alot of RAM etc I will balance out app on each node.

I will have Active/Active - In-House - Passive (Colo Location) Geo Gluster (mirrored Disk Controllers) - this will solve HA AND DR

Option1 = Active/Active - InHouse - Standby Site (Colo Location) Mirroring/Log Ship/Replication/Disk Replication - Not sure what to do here.

Steve u had mentioned to use Clustering and mirror out to DR Site - have u any documents on explaining how this will work together i dont fell confident that they would work well together maybe this needs a Microsoft Support Call..

mike mcneer Ten Centuries Points: 1189 More actions · Answer 5

Laura,

Understand , devs are pushing me here to get the upgrade going. Trying to hold them wolves back as long as I can so far the new tools have given me a bad taste in my mouth for it.

Well, yes that is a hard decision and one i am trying to make myself.

option 1: We were looking at NAS devices and mirroring them and it seemed to do what we want though the costs were high. Advantage being can be used to mirror several applications/platforms all in one shot. Less management. covers more bases

Option 2 Replication would work fine but who wants another replicated headache to keep up with i personally do not. Plus that means a form of replication for every instance you need to DR.

Option 3: I have used a form of log shipping for standby sites and seems to be ok, however it can have some headaches as well though in my opinion not as many as replication.

I would prefer option 1 and would settle for option 3 but replication is out in my book from a DR perspective if the business can settle for a acceptable amount of lost data based on translog frequency. If not acceptable then repl it is. It is really a business decision to be made.

i would love to hear others perspectives on this as i am sure this is a decision we are all being asked to make.