April 18, 2013 at 12:48 am
Hello Guys,
I am about to implement sql server 2012 AwalysOn Availability group and my question is around storage.
Does AlwaysOn availability group work with Shareddisk or only disk that are local to the computer(node)?
Thank you
April 18, 2013 at 1:52 am
Hi,
You could use them with a shared disk but I don't know that I'd do that (you'd have to store two or more copies of the database on the shared storage). I'd configure a windows failover cluster where there's shared storage.
Where there is no shared storage then I'd evaluate Always On.
Thanks,
Simon
April 18, 2013 at 2:16 am
Hi,
Thank you for the prompt reply. So you reckon that using Shared disk for AlwaysOn availability groups would be a challenge?
The design here is to have an active secondaries that will accept only read only queries. In the case of shared storage can a specific disk be presented to only a node only and the other in WSFC won't have access to it?
Kind Regards,
Shola
April 18, 2013 at 2:21 am
phebsix (4/18/2013)
So you reckon that using Shared disk for AlwaysOn availability groups would be a challenge?
No, just not worth doing in my opinion. If the storage is shared why double your storage requirement so that you can use Always On. Also if you're looking to have a readable secondary to offload reporting from the primary database surely you'd want that on seperate storage? Otherwise you'll more than likely have the same bottlenecks as before.
The design here is to have an active secondaries that will accept only read only queries.
Great!, exactly what always on can be used for.
In the case of shared storage can a specific disk be presented to only a node only and the other in WSFC won't have access to it?
Yes that is possible. What do you mean by shared storage? Are we talking about a SAN here? or a shared disk array?
April 18, 2013 at 3:35 am
Hi Thanks for the great clarification with regards shared storage I am talking about SAN disks.
Thanks once again
April 18, 2013 at 3:40 am
In that case yes, the SAN admin should be able to create volumes that are restricted to particular servers. But... I'd still favour clustering here over Always On.
April 18, 2013 at 3:47 am
Ok mate thank you so much for this, truly helpful.
April 18, 2013 at 6:56 am
The whole point of AlwaysOn is that you don't have shared storage. There's nothing to say that the disks cant be SAN based but they're not shared across the windows cluster.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" 😉
April 18, 2013 at 7:53 am
Given the really basic nature of the questions you are asking I feel you should REALLY get someone experienced and knowledgeable to help you determine what your HA/DR/read-only scale-out needs are and then help you configure the proper solution for those needs. What you are dealing with isn't something you just ask a few questions about on a forum and then slap into production and hope things work out OK. I have seen some really unfortunate things happen (including companies going out of business) due to messing things like this up.
Best,
Kevin G. Boles
SQL Server Consultant
SQL MVP 2007-2012
TheSQLGuru on googles mail service
April 18, 2013 at 8:45 am
TheSQLGuru (4/18/2013)
Given the really basic nature of the questions you are asking I feel you should REALLY get someone experienced and knowledgeable to help you determine what your HA/DR/read-only scale-out needs are and then help you configure the proper solution for those needs. What you are dealing with isn't something you just ask a few questions about on a forum and then slap into production and hope things work out OK. I have seen some really unfortunate things happen (including companies going out of business) due to messing things like this up.
I couldn't agree more Kevin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs" 😉
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply