March 15, 2011 at 2:37 am
Hi,
I would like some advice on whether this design for clustering is appropriate. The plan is to have 1 physical server and 1 vm in a cluster which will then failover with same setup. I don't see why we should include the vm in a cluster as I thought the physical machine will suffice. Any advice well appreciated.
Thanks
March 15, 2011 at 2:56 am
In clustering the two nodes should be identical. That's hardware, OS, drivers, etc. Clustering a physical box with a virtual is definitely not having two identical nodes.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
March 15, 2011 at 3:38 am
GilaMonster (3/15/2011)
In clustering the two nodes should be identical. That's hardware, OS, drivers, etc. Clustering a physical box with a virtual is definitely not having two identical nodes.
Correct, although a Physical (primary) and Virtual (Secondary) is not impossible and can be done.
There are some tricks to perform for the virtual though.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This thing is addressing problems that dont exist. Its solution-ism at its worst. We are dumbing down machines that are inherently superior. - Gilfoyle
March 15, 2011 at 4:28 am
Hi,
Thanks for the info, Henrico do you have any articles of how I could implement the physical/vm side? I know I will need to present the VM as raw devices.
March 15, 2011 at 6:46 am
GilaMonster (3/15/2011)
In clustering the two nodes should be identical. That's hardware, OS, drivers, etc. Clustering a physical box with a virtual is definitely not having two identical nodes.
The key here is "should" and is therefore recommended for a number of reasons such as the ability to failover and still maintain a consistant level service. Therefore there is nothing stopping you implementing a cluster with different hardware so long as you are willing to support two different servers and their potentially unique issues.
My previous company accepted that in the event of a serious hardware failure, they would accept a reduced capacity server until such a problem could be fixed. We had 3 servers of the same model admittedly. Two were identical and ran their own instance of SQL, the third was a lower spec CPU and reduced RAM.
A side point, Microsoft no longer dictate that a cluster hardware should be on "the list" to be supported as part of Windows 2008.
March 16, 2011 at 4:01 pm
TST1 (3/15/2011)
Hi,Thanks for the info, Henrico do you have any articles of how I could implement the physical/vm side? I know I will need to present the VM as raw devices.
Are these ESX server VMs?
What shared storage medium are you using?
clustering a physical box with a VM is perfectly valid, at minimum, ensure they utilise the same operating system and patch level.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ya can't make an omelette without breaking just a few eggs"
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply
This website stores cookies on your computer.
These cookies are used to improve your website experience and provide more personalized services to you, both on this website and through other media.
To find out more about the cookies we use, see our Privacy Policy