July 21, 2006 at 8:58 am
Hi,
We recently built a cluster(Active/Passive) for one third party app everything went well but the app has some problems they need two have two datbases with same names(For their primary and backup app servers to talk to which was discussed before and we don't have any additional servers to put this on ) so the suggestion was to create a second instance on the cluster which i am not a big fan of ...so i want to throw this question to you guys and see if you have any suggestions.
Thanks In Advance!
July 21, 2006 at 9:40 am
i'd proboably say install the other instance on the failover node and set it up as ACTIVE/ACTIVE.
at least you can make use of the other node for reporting or other purposes.
MVDBA
July 21, 2006 at 9:50 am
Mike,
So you want to make the cluster ACTIVE/ACTIVE and then install a named stand alone instance on the failover node.Is my assumption correct.
Thanks,
July 24, 2006 at 10:10 am
not sure i understand the reply - basically turn the passive node into an active node.
no point running 2 active instances on the same hardware unless you go into a failover scenario.
MVDBA
July 24, 2006 at 11:32 am
Ok..Then i understood you correct.
When ever a failover occurs there will be two instances on the failover node ..am i right.
Thanks Again..
July 24, 2006 at 10:35 pm
sounds like the application needs to be tweaked so that the name/connections to the server are parameterized and placed in an ini file, instead of hardcoded. an app should NOT require a specific database name...how do you run a test instance then?
typical of a nearsighted developer to say "buy another server and build an new cluster" instead of fixing the problem witht he applicaiton.
i may be reading this wrong, but i'd throw it back at the developers.
Lowell
July 25, 2006 at 3:28 am
thats correct - on failover 2 instances - beware you have to have different instance names!!
i agree with lowell though. they shouldn't hardcode the database name. it might be worth you coaxing (or even paying) the developers to sort this out rather than pay for another SQL Enterprise liscence (ouch £££££)
saying that though - id you do make this active/active at least you're not wasting hardware.
shame it's not SQL2005 - you could have used mirroring and saved yourself a lot of aggro.
MVDBA
July 25, 2006 at 7:04 am
Guys,
Thanks For your advice..It's a third party app i did said to figure out this from the app side rather than having an another instance.
But i am asking this because just in case.....
Thanks,
July 26, 2006 at 5:19 am
If you have to change the code to refer to a different name as you have to add the instance details, you might as well have a different name for the database.
I had a problem working with SQL over the network using databases that were the same name on different instances, despite being very careful with the naming and code, data was inserted into the wrong database. The problem wasn't with the code but with DNS, On a cluster you are likely to run into problems. I wouldn't go there clusters are flakey enough.
July 26, 2006 at 6:42 am
Thanks For The Heads UP!
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply