November 15, 2010 at 4:00 am
Hi all, just wanted to get your opinion on this, I am building a SQL Server 2008 Cluster,(Full scale and size yet to be determined), it will have a few active nodes and at least one passive node, however I am thinking if I have more than 6 active nodes 1 passive node is not enough and I should add another passive node, what’s your thoughts on this please?
November 15, 2010 at 1:29 pm
If you're doing a large cluster like that, there's still an extremely low chance that you'll have 2 servers down at the same time. Even if you did have two down, could they both run on the same node temporarily until you got one back online? In most cases, the answer is yes.
November 16, 2010 at 2:39 am
Thanks, I agree it does sound very unlikely that two nodes will go down at the same time
November 23, 2010 at 12:59 am
The only real reason can think of to have more and two nodes in a cluster is to save on hardware costs and by installing more than one active node. Effectively combining two or more clusters together.
With the amount of redundancy already built into most server, it would almost certainly take a near catastrophic hardware failure to cause the server to failover for anything other than maintenance anyway.
The real key to ensuring the availability of the SQL server once you have a cluster is good network configuration as this is going to the be the weak point.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply