Have two active SQL servers

Right now I am working on a project that requires two active SQL servers with
different local web servers accross geographic locations. I read an article
on Active-Active SQL servers and am seeing some possiblity in SQL 2005 for
this situation to work but in SQL 2000 is there any way to have two servers
with independent RAID arrays sync over the network to have different users
modifying records?
Thanks,
Joseph Ronzio
You are basically asking if you can use Majority Node Set (MNS) clustering.
SQL 2000 does not support it. Some third parties does have excellent
products that work. NSI is one that comes to mind, LeftHand software, etc.
Check my website for more.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"Joseph" <Joseph@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:772EC28E-A275-42B5-A610-3925F0C3542B@.microsoft.com...
> Right now I am working on a project that requires two active SQL servers
> with
> different local web servers accross geographic locations. I read an
> article
> on Active-Active SQL servers and am seeing some possiblity in SQL 2005 for
> this situation to work but in SQL 2000 is there any way to have two
> servers
> with independent RAID arrays sync over the network to have different users
> modifying records?
> Thanks,
> Joseph Ronzio
|||And SQL Server Clustering does not support 2 nodes modifying data in the
same physical DB (neither does Oracle or Sybase clustering).
If you need 2 nodes modifying data, look at replication.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
message news:#0Y8BfF5EHA.2624@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> You are basically asking if you can use Majority Node Set (MNS)
clustering.[vbcol=seagreen]
> SQL 2000 does not support it. Some third parties does have excellent
> products that work. NSI is one that comes to mind, LeftHand software, etc.
> Check my website for more.
> Cheers,
> Rod
> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
> http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
> http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
> "Joseph" <Joseph@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:772EC28E-A275-42B5-A610-3925F0C3542B@.microsoft.com...
for[vbcol=seagreen]
users
>
|||So MySQL, Lotus Domino and IBM DB2 can do this but MS SQL can't? From my
reading it looks like SQL 2005 might be able to do this will it?
Thanks,
Joseph Ronzio
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:

> And SQL Server Clustering does not support 2 nodes modifying data in the
> same physical DB (neither does Oracle or Sybase clustering).
> If you need 2 nodes modifying data, look at replication.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
> message news:#0Y8BfF5EHA.2624@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> clustering.
> for
> users
>
>
|||Hi
No, SQL Server 2005 will not. There will still be one primary node that
handles all the work.
Clustering by definition, is for high availability, not load balancing.
Regards
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"Joseph" <Joseph@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E2BF74E7-ADEE-4C9F-B183-44D1D6C87122@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> So MySQL, Lotus Domino and IBM DB2 can do this but MS SQL can't? From my
> reading it looks like SQL 2005 might be able to do this will it?
> Thanks,
> Joseph Ronzio
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
etc.[vbcol=seagreen]
servers[vbcol=seagreen]
2005[vbcol=seagreen]
|||That's only true about SQL Server!
Oracle RAC (and 10g grid) does support modifying the same shared physical DB
from any node. Basically, the same physical database is exposed to multiple
nodes with consistency controlled via distributed lock manager. I believe
Sybase has also just started to offer such a feature.
In theory at least, this approach offers both failover (HA) and scalability
(dynamic load balancing over more nodes since a query can be routed to any
node for processing).
Linchi
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:O6S7HdG5EHA.3416@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> And SQL Server Clustering does not support 2 nodes modifying data in the
> same physical DB (neither does Oracle or Sybase clustering).
> If you need 2 nodes modifying data, look at replication.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
> message news:#0Y8BfF5EHA.2624@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> clustering.
> for
> users
>
|||Ok apparently there was some confusion when I posted this I'm not talking the
same physcial database I am talking about replication where two database
servers have the same database but different copies. Can both database
servers have modification made to the database and replicate changes?
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:

> And SQL Server Clustering does not support 2 nodes modifying data in the
> same physical DB (neither does Oracle or Sybase clustering).
> If you need 2 nodes modifying data, look at replication.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]" <rod@.die.spam.die.nw-america.com> wrote in
> message news:#0Y8BfF5EHA.2624@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> clustering.
> for
> users
>
>
|||You can do two-way replication, but what do you gain? Both servers not only
have to handle all the updates but they have to handle synching them with
their partner. The nodes won't split the work unless the database uses
partitioned views, something that only fits a very few scenarios.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Joseph" <Joseph@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:41FDC5C9-93E1-4639-BDAC-BE3648F322A2@.microsoft.com...
> Ok apparently there was some confusion when I posted this I'm not talking
the[vbcol=seagreen]
> same physcial database I am talking about replication where two database
> servers have the same database but different copies. Can both database
> servers have modification made to the database and replicate changes?
> "Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" wrote:
etc.[vbcol=seagreen]
servers[vbcol=seagreen]
2005[vbcol=seagreen]
|||I would get the capability to have two servers in different geographic
regions with two different web farms for referencing and modifying data.
Granted there could be conflicts generated but in Lotus Domino today I don't
have that problem with our typical business records and I'd be migrating the
same application to SQL. I would just need the resources that would instruct
me how to do this for SQL.
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> You can do two-way replication, but what do you gain? Both servers not only
> have to handle all the updates but they have to handle synching them with
> their partner. The nodes won't split the work unless the database uses
> partitioned views, something that only fits a very few scenarios.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "Joseph" <Joseph@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:41FDC5C9-93E1-4639-BDAC-BE3648F322A2@.microsoft.com...
> the
> etc.
> servers
> 2005
>
>
|||Have you considered Merge Replication?
Or if you want to use Transactional Replication then you can use Transactional Replication with Updating Subscribers.
Best Regards,
Uttam Parui
Microsoft Corporation
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit http://www.microsoft.com/security.
Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. The easiest way to do this is to visit the following websites:
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
http://www.microsoft.com/security/guidance/default.mspx

hardware upgrade of active/active cluster

I'm planning a hardware upgrade of our active/active dual node Windows
2000 sql cluster. Hostnames and IP addresses will remain unchanged.
Here's a high level overview of my plan..
1. move all cluster groups/resources to node 2
2. shutdown sql services on node 1
3. uninstall MSCS on node 1
4. evict node 1 from cluster using cluster administrator on node 2
5. power down node 1
6. reset node 1 account in domain
7. add new node 1 to domain
8. install MSCS on new node 1
9. install sql server on new node 1
10. install sql sp2 on new node 1
11. add new node 1 to existing cluster
12. verify that all resources can move to new node 1 correctly
** repeat for node 2
I know this has been discussed several times before in this newsgroup,
but there's a few extra steps in there that I believe have not been
addressed in the past. Does the above look accurate and also is it
feasible to roll back to a ghost image and backup of the quarum in the
event of a problem with either server?
Thanks in advance,
David
Step 1.5 Uninstall SQL from Node 1. If you do not do this step, you cannot
do step 9. Uninstalling SQL also tells the existing cluster not to look for
that node any longer as a valid SQL host node. You can do it as step 8.5,
but you will have to wait on some timeouts since the node is no onger there.
I haven't tried a ghost of the quorum as a restore technique, but I suspect
that given the SQL configuration changes, it wouldn't work.
Since you are reusing node names, make sure you have removed all traces of
the nodes from Active Directory and allowed it to globally synch before
trying to add the machines back in.
IMHO, I would take the opportunity to upgrade to Windows 2003 as a host OS
during the upgrade. In that case, you would need to be on at least SP3a
before starting the cluster upgrade.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<davidawest@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132725533.573424.291710@.z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> I'm planning a hardware upgrade of our active/active dual node Windows
> 2000 sql cluster. Hostnames and IP addresses will remain unchanged.
> Here's a high level overview of my plan..
> 1. move all cluster groups/resources to node 2
> 2. shutdown sql services on node 1
> 3. uninstall MSCS on node 1
> 4. evict node 1 from cluster using cluster administrator on node 2
> 5. power down node 1
> 6. reset node 1 account in domain
> 7. add new node 1 to domain
> 8. install MSCS on new node 1
> 9. install sql server on new node 1
> 10. install sql sp2 on new node 1
> 11. add new node 1 to existing cluster
> 12. verify that all resources can move to new node 1 correctly
> ** repeat for node 2
> I know this has been discussed several times before in this newsgroup,
> but there's a few extra steps in there that I believe have not been
> addressed in the past. Does the above look accurate and also is it
> feasible to roll back to a ghost image and backup of the quarum in the
> event of a problem with either server?
> Thanks in advance,
> David
>

Hangs on Applying Computer Settings

I have 2 nodes Cluster Active/Passive on Windows 2003. When I reboot either
one, it comes fast no problem but when I logon to the node it takes 15
minutes waiting on "Applying Computer Settings" message then it will show
the desktop.
I didn't install SQL 2000 yet, I need to solve this issue before I install
it.
Does any one have this issue that it takes so long to logon?
Thanks
Ayad
Sounds like a service start issue. Check your system event log to see if
any services are hanging on startup. BITS is one I typically have problems
with. Setting it to manual startup seems help.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Ayad" <ashammout1@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eU0BdXBzEHA.352@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> I have 2 nodes Cluster Active/Passive on Windows 2003. When I reboot
either
> one, it comes fast no problem but when I logon to the node it takes 15
> minutes waiting on "Applying Computer Settings" message then it will show
> the desktop.
> I didn't install SQL 2000 yet, I need to solve this issue before I install
> it.
> Does any one have this issue that it takes so long to logon?
> Thanks
> Ayad
>