SQL 2005 Cluster Install

  • I have installed an active/active cluster and everything seems to be working okay. I think I may have done this in a non-standard way?? I installed the sql system files on a SAN-attached drive instead of on the local drive. The cluster appears to be working okay and the failover works as well. I am concerned that there may be performance issues associated with this install later (we are still in a test environment). Has anyone done this or know of any reasons that this may not work?

    Thanks,

    Kim

  • I'm thinking you mean Active/Passive (since ony one of the node has access to SQL server at any given time), or do you have multiple instances?

    Did you follow this procedure?

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179530.aspx

    Othwerwise - is there something leading you to think it's not stable? Are you testing it with a load on the server, or are you failing over only with low activity?

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?

  • I did follow the instructions and everything looks okay. Our failover tests have been with very little activity. This is an Active/Active cluster with multiple instances of SQL installed. My big question is whether having the tempdb and the SQL executables will cause issues. I have tried moving the model/msdb databases to new locations and this process failed. I also tried changing the location of the master database and the configuration manager would not accept the changed settings. I'm just a little concerned that these issues are indicative of bigger problems.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply