April 4, 2006 at 7:32 am
I want to use ONE (passive) SQL2k server with 2 instances of SQL running to be the backup to TWO active servers.
Each active server is in it's own cluster....so can the passive server belong to each active cluster and can it handle a major failover of each primary (active) server?
These db servers are IBM x466 8ways with 16gb ram. SQL is configured to use 13.5 gb...so does the passive server need 32 gb of ram ?
April 4, 2006 at 8:12 am
So far as I know, currently no version of SQL Server handles more than two nodes to a cluster. SQL Server 2005 is supposed to allow up to 8, but it hasn't been implemented yet, and I'd imagine it will be SP1 or so till it is. I do not believe the setup your asking for is currently possible. I know a lot of companies who would be VERY happy if it was, and when it becomes so, as they could remove a great deal of hardware without losing the redundency.
April 5, 2006 at 5:09 am
I don't know if this is strictly relevant, but several of our SQL installations are using three nodes, albeit they are active-passive-passive. The server guys who set them up said it was needed by "majority node" configuration and attachment to a SAN for data and logs.
Mike Hinds Lead Database Administrator1st Source BankMCP, MCTS
April 5, 2006 at 7:00 am
From the BOL Clustering Overview:
...Install SQL Server on multiple nodes in a failover cluster. You are limited only by the number of nodes supported by the operating system....
So, you can have a 3 node cluster, but it is one cluster. I do not believe that there is any (supported) way to have a cluster node that is part of two different clusters.
jg
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply