January 19, 2006 at 9:03 am
I think its possible to have 2005 and 2000 on the same machine. However I have a sql 2000 instance running on a cluster. Is it possible to have 2005 on the same cluster? Is it recommended? I have had no luck on msdn on this topic so I thought I will post it here.
Also does 2005 instance require an separate IP address in this case?
Thanks
January 19, 2006 at 7:47 pm
Hi,
It is possible that u can install two instances of Sql Server 2000 and 2005 but diffrent location , i dont know it is recommended by Microsoft or not.No 2005 doesnt require any seprate IP Addres.
from
Killer
January 20, 2006 at 6:50 am
If you're installing on a cluster, SQL Server 2005 probably will need its own IP address. Every SQL Server 2000 virtual server in a cluster requires an IP address.
January 20, 2006 at 11:04 am
each instance will need its own port number
January 20, 2006 at 12:41 pm
But if you want the SQL Virtual Servers to be able to fail over between physical nodes independantly (and otherwise, why cluster), they will each need their own IP addr.
January 20, 2006 at 5:42 pm
MSCS and SQL Server support only one instance per cluster group. For each instance of SQL Server you need a separate cluster group, with its own virtual name/ip.
See http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189134.aspx
"A failover cluster is a combination of one or more nodes (servers) with two or more shared disks, known as a resource group. The combination of a resource group, along with its network name, and an internet protocol (IP) address that makes up the clustered application or server, is referred to as a virtual server. A SQL Server virtual server appears on the network as if it were a single computer, but has functionality that provides failover from one node to another if the current node becomes unavailable. A failover cluster appears as a normal application or server, but it has additional functionality that increases its availability. Both the server cluster itself and the SQL Server instance installed on a cluster server can be considered virtual servers.
Support for multiple instances of SQL Server 2005 differs in the failover clustering scenario: you can create multiple virtual servers in a cluster, but each virtual server can have only one instance of SQL Server installed."
I'm trying to get this installed, for the first time, myself. If anyone has any great tips I'd love to hear them.
February 2, 2006 at 12:54 am
Hi everybody,
I am installing a "two-node active/ative cluster" or Multi-Instance with Windows Server 2003.
I am installing SQL Server 2005 Standard, and the first Instance is Ok (clustered), but the second can not be clustered. It install like a second instance in one node (it seems to install similar in thesecond node), but when setup finish, only one node has the instance installed.
Is that because I am installing SQL Server 2005 Standard?, Could I solution this installing SQL SErver 2005 Enterprise (too much money)?.
Thanks
February 2, 2006 at 10:07 am
Clustering support is limited in Standard Edition, but I can't tell from BOL whether multiple instances are supported or not. Did you put the second instance in a different cluster group/virtual server as described earlier in this thread? Were there any error messages displayed or logged during installation?
As a test (a time-consuming one) you could start over and use Developer Edition if you have that available. If that doesn't work either, there's something wrong with the way you're trying to do this. If Developer Edition works, but the same configuration doesn't work with Standard Edition, I think you're out of luck, meaning you'll need to buy Enterprise Edition.
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply