September 9, 2005 at 12:04 pm
We have a client that wants a highly redundant SQL system.
They have 2 critical DB's that can have almost 0 downtime.
My question is this, and i'm open to comments on a better solution.
Would this be possible with out having a high cost on licensing or is SQL capable of this senario to begin with...
Active Passive
=========================
Server 1 DB1 => Server 2 DB1
Server 2 DB2 => Server 1 DB2
So if DB1 on Server 1 goes down it fails to server 2 that is the active for DB2? And visa versa for Server 2 and DB2.
Thoughts and suggestions would be appriciated.
Chad Jones
Jettis Systems
September 9, 2005 at 2:26 pm
Yes, this is possible i.e. 2 servers, each running an active instance and using the other server to failover i.e. you would have 2 Active/Passive combinations.
You do have to make sure though that the servers are sized adequately to support two instances on a machine when the failover occurs i.e. the servers should have sufficitenly processing power and memory to be able to support 2 active instances in the case of a failover.
September 9, 2005 at 2:51 pm
Could i make it so that each instance only uses one CPU on a dual machine? Pretty much have a passive CPU that is only used for fail over?
September 12, 2005 at 10:48 am
You can - but I would not advise doing that. You should configure each instance to use all available CPUs on that box for best performance of your applications. In the event of the failover, the load from both the instances will be distributed on the two CPUs and you should have a fail-back mechanism as well once you have taken care of the issue that lead to the fail-over.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply