In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
Thanks!
No. Each virtual server can host exactly one instance.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Robert Kinesta" <RobertKinesta@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D02ECF04-7BC1-41B5-B35D-88D938E28FCC@.microsoft.com...
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!
|||Hi,
Yes you can do that.
It is called a Multiple-Instance cluster. A Multile-Instance cluster
supports upto four nodes and supports 16 instances (1 default and 15 named or
16 named). This implementation requires extensive planning as each virtual
server requires its own disk resources that can not be shared by other
instances.
Hth
DeeJay Puar
MCDBA
"Robert Kinesta" wrote:
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!
Showing posts with label failover. Show all posts
Showing posts with label failover. Show all posts
Friday, March 30, 2012
multiple instances on one virtual server
In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
Thanks!No. Each virtual server can host exactly one instance.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Robert Kinesta" <RobertKinesta@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D02ECF04-7BC1-41B5-B35D-88D938E28FCC@.microsoft.com...
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!|||Hi,
Yes you can do that.
It is called a Multiple-Instance cluster. A Multile-Instance cluster
supports upto four nodes and supports 16 instances (1 default and 15 named o
r
16 named). This implementation requires extensive planning as each virtual
server requires its own disk resources that can not be shared by other
instances.
Hth
DeeJay Puar
MCDBA
"Robert Kinesta" wrote:
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!
Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
Thanks!No. Each virtual server can host exactly one instance.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Robert Kinesta" <RobertKinesta@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D02ECF04-7BC1-41B5-B35D-88D938E28FCC@.microsoft.com...
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!|||Hi,
Yes you can do that.
It is called a Multiple-Instance cluster. A Multile-Instance cluster
supports upto four nodes and supports 16 instances (1 default and 15 named o
r
16 named). This implementation requires extensive planning as each virtual
server requires its own disk resources that can not be shared by other
instances.
Hth
DeeJay Puar
MCDBA
"Robert Kinesta" wrote:
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!
multiple instances on one virtual server
In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
Thanks!No. Each virtual server can host exactly one instance.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Robert Kinesta" <RobertKinesta@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D02ECF04-7BC1-41B5-B35D-88D938E28FCC@.microsoft.com...
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!|||Hi,
Yes you can do that.
It is called a Multiple-Instance cluster. A Multile-Instance cluster
supports upto four nodes and supports 16 instances (1 default and 15 named or
16 named). This implementation requires extensive planning as each virtual
server requires its own disk resources that can not be shared by other
instances.
Hth
DeeJay Puar
MCDBA
"Robert Kinesta" wrote:
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!
Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
Thanks!No. Each virtual server can host exactly one instance.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Robert Kinesta" <RobertKinesta@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D02ECF04-7BC1-41B5-B35D-88D938E28FCC@.microsoft.com...
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!|||Hi,
Yes you can do that.
It is called a Multiple-Instance cluster. A Multile-Instance cluster
supports upto four nodes and supports 16 instances (1 default and 15 named or
16 named). This implementation requires extensive planning as each virtual
server requires its own disk resources that can not be shared by other
instances.
Hth
DeeJay Puar
MCDBA
"Robert Kinesta" wrote:
> In a failover cluster is there any way at all that more than one named SQL
> Server instance can exist on a virtual server?
> Thanks!
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Multiple Clusters with shared passive nodes
Is it possible to take 5 servers and make 4 individual clusters and
share the 5th server amongst all of them as the failover node? These
clusters would be running SQL 2000 and attached to a SAN enviroment.
Sort of - I'd create all 5 servers as members of a single cluster, then
set up 4 instances of SQL Server with cluster server member 1 configured
to be able to run instance 1, member 2 to run instance 2, member 3 to
run instance 3, member 4 to run instance 4, and member 5 to run
instances 1 2 3 and 4.
While you are able to have cluster member 5 be the failover for all the
other instances, there might be a better way to set which member servers
can run each instance, but its not difficult to change this at a later
date - it might not be an optimal configuration if all the instances are
of different memory needs or if you want to handle a situation where
more than one cluster member might be unavailable at a time.
Good luck,
Tony Sebion
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128006737.120461.270030@.g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:
> Is it possible to take 5 servers and make 4 individual clusters and
> share the 5th server amongst all of them as the failover node? These
> clusters would be running SQL 2000 and attached to a SAN enviroment.
|||So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
have to be in its own cluster group right?
So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
drive and Cluster management IP?
Thanks
|||Yup, that's exactly what I was thinking.
Tony
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128010958.220046.38020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:
> So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
> have to be in its own cluster group right?
> So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
> Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
> drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
> drive and Cluster management IP?
> Thanks
|||There are a couple of Got'chas. What Tony is referring to is called a
"Round Robin" multi-instanced cluster. The one you described is referred to
as an "N + I" multi-instanced cluster. Both are supported; however, only
SS2K 64-bit allows more than 4 nodes in a SQL Server cluster. Windows 2K
Advanced Server only allows 2-node clusters. 2K Datacenter Edition supports
4-node clusters. Both Windows 2K3 Enterprise and Datacenter Editions
support 8-node clusters, but 32-bit SQL Server 2K does not unless the you
use the IA-64 edition.
PRB: Virtual SQL Server 2000 installation fails on cluster that has eight
nodes
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;811054
Windows Server 2003 Server Cluster Architecture
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...ercluster.mspx
Good luck.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Tony Sebion" <tony@.sebion.com> wrote in message
news:3q2j44Fctu5kU1@.individual.net...
Yup, that's exactly what I was thinking.
Tony
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128010958.220046.38020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:
> So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
> have to be in its own cluster group right?
> So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
> Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
> drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
> drive and Cluster management IP?
> Thanks
share the 5th server amongst all of them as the failover node? These
clusters would be running SQL 2000 and attached to a SAN enviroment.
Sort of - I'd create all 5 servers as members of a single cluster, then
set up 4 instances of SQL Server with cluster server member 1 configured
to be able to run instance 1, member 2 to run instance 2, member 3 to
run instance 3, member 4 to run instance 4, and member 5 to run
instances 1 2 3 and 4.
While you are able to have cluster member 5 be the failover for all the
other instances, there might be a better way to set which member servers
can run each instance, but its not difficult to change this at a later
date - it might not be an optimal configuration if all the instances are
of different memory needs or if you want to handle a situation where
more than one cluster member might be unavailable at a time.
Good luck,
Tony Sebion
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128006737.120461.270030@.g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:
> Is it possible to take 5 servers and make 4 individual clusters and
> share the 5th server amongst all of them as the failover node? These
> clusters would be running SQL 2000 and attached to a SAN enviroment.
|||So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
have to be in its own cluster group right?
So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
drive and Cluster management IP?
Thanks
|||Yup, that's exactly what I was thinking.
Tony
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128010958.220046.38020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:
> So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
> have to be in its own cluster group right?
> So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
> Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
> drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
> drive and Cluster management IP?
> Thanks
|||There are a couple of Got'chas. What Tony is referring to is called a
"Round Robin" multi-instanced cluster. The one you described is referred to
as an "N + I" multi-instanced cluster. Both are supported; however, only
SS2K 64-bit allows more than 4 nodes in a SQL Server cluster. Windows 2K
Advanced Server only allows 2-node clusters. 2K Datacenter Edition supports
4-node clusters. Both Windows 2K3 Enterprise and Datacenter Editions
support 8-node clusters, but 32-bit SQL Server 2K does not unless the you
use the IA-64 edition.
PRB: Virtual SQL Server 2000 installation fails on cluster that has eight
nodes
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;811054
Windows Server 2003 Server Cluster Architecture
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...ercluster.mspx
Good luck.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Tony Sebion" <tony@.sebion.com> wrote in message
news:3q2j44Fctu5kU1@.individual.net...
Yup, that's exactly what I was thinking.
Tony
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128010958.220046.38020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:
> So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
> have to be in its own cluster group right?
> So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
> Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
> drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
> drive and Cluster management IP?
> Thanks
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)