has anyone here done Stretch Clustering?

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr.../sql/2000/deplo
y/hasog05.mspx
Has anyone used the Stretch Clustering techniques used in
this article? If it works that good theres no reason to
use Transactional Replication is there? What are the
goods/ bads?
TIA, ChrisROne of the banks here uses this quite successfully...
There is a difference between this and transactional replication...
Stretch clustering allows ONLY the primary node to access the data at any
given time.
There is a limit of 4 nodes on the cluster.
The hardware is more expensive.
This is a high availability solution
Replication may have many subscribers to the same publication, all
accessed/updated concurrently.
Less expensive hardware is required.
This works on SQL Standard Edition (Clustering requires EE)
Replication does NOT replicate system tables ( no users/permissions, etc) ,
but the Stretch clustering covers everything.
Replication is intended to make near real time copies of the data available
locally and is not a high availability solution...
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"ChrisR" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2ae5201c4685a$22b5c660$a601280a@.phx
.gbl...
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr.../sql/2000/deplo
> y/hasog05.mspx
> Has anyone used the Stretch Clustering techniques used in
> this article? If it works that good theres no reason to
> use Transactional Replication is there? What are the
> goods/ bads?
> TIA, ChrisR

has anyone here done Stretch Clustering?

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...sql/2000/deplo
y/hasog05.mspx
Has anyone used the Stretch Clustering techniques used in
this article? If it works that good theres no reason to
use Transactional Replication is there? What are the
goods/ bads?
TIA, ChrisR
One of the banks here uses this quite successfully...
There is a difference between this and transactional replication...
Stretch clustering allows ONLY the primary node to access the data at any
given time.
There is a limit of 4 nodes on the cluster.
The hardware is more expensive.
This is a high availability solution
Replication may have many subscribers to the same publication, all
accessed/updated concurrently.
Less expensive hardware is required.
This works on SQL Standard Edition (Clustering requires EE)
Replication does NOT replicate system tables ( no users/permissions, etc) ,
but the Stretch clustering covers everything.
Replication is intended to make near real time copies of the data available
locally and is not a high availability solution...
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"ChrisR" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2ae5201c4685a$22b5c660$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...sql/2000/deplo
> y/hasog05.mspx
> Has anyone used the Stretch Clustering techniques used in
> this article? If it works that good theres no reason to
> use Transactional Replication is there? What are the
> goods/ bads?
> TIA, ChrisR

has anyone here done Stretch Clustering?

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/deplo
y/hasog05.mspx
Has anyone used the Stretch Clustering techniques used in
this article? If it works that good theres no reason to
use Transactional Replication is there? What are the
goods/ bads?
TIA, ChrisROne of the banks here uses this quite successfully...
There is a difference between this and transactional replication...
Stretch clustering allows ONLY the primary node to access the data at any
given time.
There is a limit of 4 nodes on the cluster.
The hardware is more expensive.
This is a high availability solution
Replication may have many subscribers to the same publication, all
accessed/updated concurrently.
Less expensive hardware is required.
This works on SQL Standard Edition (Clustering requires EE)
Replication does NOT replicate system tables ( no users/permissions, etc) ,
but the Stretch clustering covers everything.
Replication is intended to make near real time copies of the data available
locally and is not a high availability solution...
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"ChrisR" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2ae5201c4685a$22b5c660$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/deplo
> y/hasog05.mspx
> Has anyone used the Stretch Clustering techniques used in
> this article? If it works that good theres no reason to
> use Transactional Replication is there? What are the
> goods/ bads?
> TIA, ChrisR

Hardware Requirements for SQL server DB Clustering

Hi,
I want to cluster my SQL server DB and just wondering what hardware (how
many systems, adapters, what will be installed on what etc) will be required
to do the same. We are planning to use Win2k3 "Server Cluster" service for
the same.
Where will SQL Server DB reside? What will be installed on Nodes?
Thanks in advance
Pankaj A. Chitriv
Its a pretty vague question with a lot of decisions to be made. You need at
least two servers with the same hardware. Each server should have at least 2
nic cards. You need to decide what type of shared storage you want. It can
range from a scsi drive array to a fiber channel SAN.
The database needs to reside on the shared storage. If you have only one
database you will be using and active/passive clustering model.
You can Google or search MS for SQL and clustering and come up with a slew
of reading. Check with your hardware vendor to work out the hardware details
and come up with something you want and can afford. We'll be here to help
along the way.
Hope it helps.........
dw
Don Wilwol
http://spaces.msn.com/members/wilwol/
"Pankaj" <pankajchitriv@.rediffmail.com(donotspam)> wrote in message
news:36FB2975-3CCB-4160-8503-DAD488F140E0@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I want to cluster my SQL server DB and just wondering what hardware (how
> many systems, adapters, what will be installed on what etc) will be
> required
> to do the same. We are planning to use Win2k3 "Server Cluster" service for
> the same.
> Where will SQL Server DB reside? What will be installed on Nodes?
> Thanks in advance
> Pankaj A. Chitriv
>
|||Pankaj,
I've got more information for you. I'm most familiar with
COMPAQ/HP cluster implementations, so I'll suggest
something from their product line that will give you an
idea as to what hardware is needed. There is something
called a "packaged cluster", which contains what you need
(a baseline config only. There are many options to consider)
Just google for "DL380 packaged cluster" and hit the first link
that comes up. (today, anyway) It should
Now, for more in-depth "how-to-do-it" information, I will
suggest that you get a book called
"Sql server 2000 Black Book" by Coriolis.
This book explains in great detail what needs to be done to
get clustered SQL working. Only about 40 pages of it is
for clustering, but I still think that it is the best
printed resource.
Costs about 60 bucks but worth it, since you are about to spend 40K or more...
Good Luck!
jg

Quote:

Originally posted by Pankaj
Hi,
I want to cluster my SQL server DB and just wondering what hardware (how
many systems, adapters, what will be installed on what etc) will be required
to do the same. We are planning to use Win2k3 "Server Cluster" service for
the same.
Where will SQL Server DB reside? What will be installed on Nodes?
Thanks in advance
Pankaj A. Chitriv

|||Thanks a lot Don.
"Don Wilwol" wrote:

> Its a pretty vague question with a lot of decisions to be made. You need at
> least two servers with the same hardware. Each server should have at least 2
> nic cards. You need to decide what type of shared storage you want. It can
> range from a scsi drive array to a fiber channel SAN.
> The database needs to reside on the shared storage. If you have only one
> database you will be using and active/passive clustering model.
> You can Google or search MS for SQL and clustering and come up with a slew
> of reading. Check with your hardware vendor to work out the hardware details
> and come up with something you want and can afford. We'll be here to help
> along the way.
> --
> Hope it helps.........
> dw
> Don Wilwol
> http://spaces.msn.com/members/wilwol/
>
> "Pankaj" <pankajchitriv@.rediffmail.com(donotspam)> wrote in message
> news:36FB2975-3CCB-4160-8503-DAD488F140E0@.microsoft.com...
>
>

HA clustering with replication

Node A and Node B (sql server 2000) are being replicated to each other
serving data partitioning.
What are the options to set up HA clustering and which one is the most
economic one?
Appreciate any help.
I think you want a cluster. Here are a few guides for you:
General Clustering information
http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/su...tering_faq.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000...ustersteps.asp
SQL Clustering
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../failclus.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/usa/webcasts/ondemand/1883.asp (Webcast)
Now for the price issue. HA and price never agree. You can either have one
or the other.
My website also has a ton of clustering information on it.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
"Wen Chang" <WenChang@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:235AAE4A-F675-4700-8795-8E9DD7CA5DC4@.microsoft.com...
> Node A and Node B (sql server 2000) are being replicated to each other
> serving data partitioning.
> What are the options to set up HA clustering and which one is the most
> economic one?
> Appreciate any help.