Clearing LOG Files: March 2012

Thursday, March 29, 2012

cluster white paper

Is there a reliable white paper for clustering sql2k on win2k3. Ive already
got the OS clustered.
SQL2K SP3
TIA, ChrisRChrisR wrote:
> Is there a reliable white paper for clustering sql2k on win2k3. Ive
> already got the OS clustered.
Some of these might help:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/...r />
1261.mspx
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...blurb101802.asp
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...
ering_2icn.asp
David Gugick
Imceda Software
www.imceda.com|||This is great information. Does anyone have any updated information on
setting up SQL Server 2000 in a Windows 2003 environment?
Just wondering if 2003 brings anything more to the table over Windows Server
2000.
Thanks!
Tony
"David Gugick" wrote:

> ChrisR wrote:
> Some of these might help:
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/.../>
/c1261.mspx
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...blurb101802.asp
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...tering_2icn.asp
> --
> David Gugick
> Imceda Software
> www.imceda.com
>

Cluster upgrade/migration issue advice.

Hey all,

We have a simple two-node x86 failover cluster attached to a SAN on which SQL Server 2005 runs. We recently bought two new x64 boxes to upgrade the cluster. My original plan was to just add the new nodes to the existing cluster and then remove the old nodes from the cluster, but I just found out that you can't mix architecture types in a cluster.

So far, it seems our choices are:

1) Install x86 Windows 2003 Server on the new nodes, losing performance.
2) Make a new cluster and migrate the data, possibly imposing downtime.

Anyone have any suggestions?You may be able to "swing" the LUNs from one cluster to the other, without much trouble. This depends on a number of factors, so you should contact your SAN vendor to see if it is feasible. If it is, then you build the 64-bit cluster, swing the LUNs over, attach all the DBs to the 64-bit instance of SQL Server, and then change all the applications that pointed to the old cluster. One caution, though, you should definitely take a real nice backup of all the databases, before you do the LUN switch, since you could potentially lose all of your databases to an inadvertent FORMAT command.|||Yeah, I think that's going to be the option we go with, since we can attach the new servers to the old LUNs, but that will involve some downtime.

I suppose we could replicate the dbs to a third server, update the important connections to point to the replicated server, do the move, point the connections to the new cluster.

Ugh.

Cluster Upgrade SP2 2005

Have recently performed an in-place upgrade of a 2 instance sql cluster from 2000 to 2005. The upgrade process went relatively smoothly. However, I am running into problems installed sp2. The first problem that I run into is that I have resrcmon.exe locked. I can click next, which is fine, but once I get past that point I get stuck during the installation process. I am updating DatabaseServices and Integration Services. It gets stuck on 'Awaiting first complete passive cluster node SQL-Test'. Does anyone have any ideas?
Thanks,
TimFor what it's worth I'm experiencing the same issue as described above. I'm using VMWare Server and have a Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition cluster with SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition clustered on top. This works well but in trying to apply SP2 it is stuck "Awaiting first complete passive cluster node". Slight difference from that described above, I had no locked files.

Any info that anyone could provide would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Ian
|||Unbelievable. Typically just as I finish writing the above, the process moved on. However it failed at the "Database Services" product. Everything else seemed to go okay but I'll have to check and will come back with any info I find.

Cheers,

Ian
|||I got my issue resolved...after talking to MS Support for half of a day. There are a lot of things that you have to make sure is just right. For example, when you install the services, it is easier to have the first node control both instances. From there, make sure you install the client tools on the default instance first. You also cannot have remote connections to the 2nd node in the cluster (will cause it to fail). Mine failed on installed the database services as well. Another thing we had to change was that when the network guys setup the cluster, the distributed transaction coordinator wasn't created as a clustered resource...it needs to be. let me know if this helps any.
Tim|||Tim,

Did you manage to continue with resrcmon.exe locked or did you find a way to stop it (it's part of the cluster so, short of stopping the cluster services I wasn't sure how else to stop it)?

We've got the DTC in place in our production cluster but I forgot to add it with my virtual one. I've done this now and will give it another go shortly.

Cheers,

Ian
|||At first I seen that resrcmon.exe was locked, and it did concern me. However, I don't think that it really matters if it is locked or not. If it is locked, you can still go through with the install, but it will prompt you to reboot later in the process. Try to kill all remote connections to either cluster node, place both instances on one node, and try to install that way. That will likely unlock resrcmon.|||I actually only have one instance, it is on the node from which I'm running the SP. WRT remote connections, I can't see anything apart from the clustering services that would be connecting remotely to the second node.

That said, I've only got resrcmon.exe locked now so am gonna proceed with the SP and see where I get - beauty of VMs is that I can just roll 'em back any time I like :-)
|||

I had the exact same issue. Installing the client tools on both nodes, and then moving the inst1 over to the passive node and running the SP2 from there seemed to do the trick.

|||I've finally had some level of success with this on my virtual cluster. But it was kinda forceful. I basically downed node 2, installed the SP onto node 1 (twice as it had "reboot required" on the SQL Server engine the first time). Then brought up node 2, failed over and downed node 1. Did the same to node 2 (twice) and brought node 1 back up. Testing seems to confirm this has gone okay. However, as we're in the process of trying to get a test cluster (for exactly this kind of thing - good as VMWare is, it's not the real thing) I'm not going to apply this to production until that's happened.

Cheers,

Ian
|||

Hi Ian,

Please help - when you downed the one node - was it shutdown or did you stop cluster service on the node or did you pause the node?

Thanks in advance :-)

|||

Hi there,

Basically I did the following.

Node 1 was up, node 2 was shutdown completely. I upgraded node 1 to SP2, then brought node 2 back online and failed over by shutting down node 1. I then upgraded node 2 to SP2, brought node 1 back online, failed over manually to confirm all as expected and left it at that. Bear in mind this was on virtual machines so is not a perfect test. I've yet to do this on our production cluster and am currently trying to get a proper physical test cluster in place to run through this for real.

Hope this helps!

Cheers,

Ian

Cluster Upgrade SP2 2005

Any info that anyone could provide would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Did you manage to continue with resrcmon.exe locked or did you find a way to stop it (it's part of the cluster so, short of stopping the cluster services I wasn't sure how else to stop it)?

We've got the DTC in place in our production cluster but I forgot to add it with my virtual one. I've done this now and will give it another go shortly.

Cheers,

That said, I've only got resrcmon.exe locked now so am gonna proceed with the SP and see where I get - beauty of VMs is that I can just roll 'em back any time I like :-)
|||

I had the exact same issue. Installing the client tools on both nodes, and then moving the inst1 over to the passive node and running the SP2 from there seemed to do the trick.

Cheers,

Ian
|||

Hi Ian,

Please help - when you downed the one node - was it shutdown or did you stop cluster service on the node or did you pause the node?

Thanks in advance :-)

|||

Hi there,

Basically I did the following.

Hope this helps!

Cheers,

Ian

sql sql

Cluster Upgrade SP2 2005

Any info that anyone could provide would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Did you manage to continue with resrcmon.exe locked or did you find a way to stop it (it's part of the cluster so, short of stopping the cluster services I wasn't sure how else to stop it)?

We've got the DTC in place in our production cluster but I forgot to add it with my virtual one. I've done this now and will give it another go shortly.

Cheers,

That said, I've only got resrcmon.exe locked now so am gonna proceed with the SP and see where I get - beauty of VMs is that I can just roll 'em back any time I like :-)
|||

I had the exact same issue. Installing the client tools on both nodes, and then moving the inst1 over to the passive node and running the SP2 from there seemed to do the trick.

Cheers,

Ian
|||

Hi Ian,

Please help - when you downed the one node - was it shutdown or did you stop cluster service on the node or did you pause the node?

Thanks in advance :-)

|||

Hi there,

Basically I did the following.

Hope this helps!

Cheers,

Ian

Cluster Upgrade

Hi,
We have a cluster (2node, 8Way, 8GB) running windows 2000 Advanced. We would
like to upgrade to windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
Whats the easiest way to accmplish this ? what are the options ? are there
any links ?
The easiest way is to upgrade in place. I don't like that technique, so I
usually recommend a two-step upgrade. First, upgrade each node in place to
Windows 2003. Then uninstall SQL from one node, evict it, rebuild it, add
it back to the cluster, and finally re-install SQL and any hotfixes. Repeat
with the other node. That way, you get an upgraded cluster with newly
rebuilt nodes. You can even change the hardware nodes at this time by using
new ones when you replace the original nodes.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Seme Rollansa" <bukusu@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OWfS9$6GGHA.3828@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> We have a cluster (2node, 8Way, 8GB) running windows 2000 Advanced. We
> would like to upgrade to windows 2003 Enterprise Edition
> Whats the easiest way to accmplish this ? what are the options ? are there
> any links ?
>

Cluster under sqlserver 2000

I would like to know if the clustering under sqlserver 2000 works fine.
Could you give some pointers in order to install a cluster under sqlserver ?
Best regardsorion30,
Yes SQL Server has fault tolerance capabilities which can be implemented with
the help of its clustering feature. SQL Server has two types of cluster
configuration ie Active/Active and Active/Passive cluster.
A cluster is a safeguard for fault tolerance for the servers, the operating
system, and the software. You can safeguard the data with the help of shared
disk arrays.
MS has a clustering feature to its operating system in Windows NT 4.0 Enterprise
Edition / WIN2K advanced & datacenter servers, this clustering feature is called
MSCS ie Microsoft Clustering Server. SQL Server's enterprise edition ships with
Clustering feature(Virtual Server).
For more information on cluster visit this url
http://www.sql-server-performance.com/clustering_intro1.asp
Also you can post your queries to more relevent newgroup
microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
-- Vishal
"orion30" <orion30@.ifrance.com> wrote in message
news:bri7f1$bvi$1@.news-reader5.wanadoo.fr...
> I would like to know if the clustering under sqlserver 2000 works fine.
> Could you give some pointers in order to install a cluster under sqlserver ?
> Best regards
>

Cluster training

Does anyone have suggestions for courses (offsite or CBT) to help my team come up to speed on clusters? My team members are DBAs.
Check out: www.solidqualitylearning.com
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Brenda Pingle" <Brenda Pingle@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:616748DE-D8DF-497F-8E9B-9B660CB0D786@.microsoft.com...
Does anyone have suggestions for courses (offsite or CBT) to help my team
come up to speed on clusters? My team members are DBAs.
|||Here is a link to Windows Clustering exam.
Exam 70-223: Installing, Configuring, and Administering Microsoft Clustering Services by Using Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server
http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-223.asp
Implementing Microsoft Windows 2000 Clustering
Course 2087: Three days; Instructor-led
http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/s...2087aFINAL.ASP
I am not aware of any exam/course for SQL Server 2000 Clustering but the following books/whitepapers/webcast should be a good starting point
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability (MS Press)
ISBN 0-7356-1920-4
Microsoft Whitepaper - SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering
http://www.microsoft.com/SQL/techinf...vercluster.asp
SQL Server 2000 Pricing and Licensing
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobu...rlicensing.asp
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability Series
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/sqlhalp.mspx
Microsoft Webcasts
Introduction to Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Clustering
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb051001.asp
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server: Things You Should Know
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb032602.asp
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server Basic Setup, Maintenance, and Service Pack http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb061002.asp
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering Disaster Recovery Procedures
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb101802.asp
Troubleshooting SQL 2000 Virtual Server and Service Pack Setups for Failover Clustering
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb020703.asp
Microsoft Knowledge Base Articles
Q243218 INF: Installation Order for SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=243218
Q260758 - INF: Frequently Asked Questions - SQL Server 2000 - Failover Clustering
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=260758
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
|||im a CTEC trainer, is their an efficient way to conduct this class course
2087 without purchasing an SCSI external hard drive for clustering? please
advise
"Uttam Parui[MS]" wrote:

> Here is a link to Windows Clustering exam.
> Exam 70-223: Installing, Configuring, and Administering Microsoft Clustering Services by Using Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server
> http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-223.asp
>
> Implementing Microsoft Windows 2000 Clustering
> Course 2087: Three days; Instructor-led
> http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/s...2087aFINAL.ASP
>
> I am not aware of any exam/course for SQL Server 2000 Clustering but the following books/whitepapers/webcast should be a good starting point
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability (MS Press)
> ISBN 0-7356-1920-4
> Microsoft Whitepaper - SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering
> http://www.microsoft.com/SQL/techinf...vercluster.asp
> SQL Server 2000 Pricing and Licensing
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobu...rlicensing.asp
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability Series
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/sqlhalp.mspx
> Microsoft Webcasts
> Introduction to Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Clustering
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb051001.asp
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server: Things You Should Know
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb032602.asp
>
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server Basic Setup, Maintenance, and Service Pack http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb061002.asp
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering Disaster Recovery Procedures
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb101802.asp
> Troubleshooting SQL 2000 Virtual Server and Service Pack Setups for Failover Clustering
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb020703.asp
>
> Microsoft Knowledge Base Articles
>
> Q243218 INF: Installation Order for SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition
> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=243218
> Q260758 - INF: Frequently Asked Questions - SQL Server 2000 - Failover Clustering
> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=260758
> 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
>
>
|||You can emulate clustering through VMWare.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Benjsoft" <Benjsoft@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0E6D46CF-6410-4154-9EF0-FBDC1A9CAE54@.microsoft.com...
im a CTEC trainer, is their an efficient way to conduct this class course
2087 without purchasing an SCSI external hard drive for clustering? please
advise
"Uttam Parui[MS]" wrote:

> Here is a link to Windows Clustering exam.
> Exam 70-223: Installing, Configuring, and Administering Microsoft
Clustering Services by Using Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server
> http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-223.asp
>
> Implementing Microsoft Windows 2000 Clustering
> Course 2087: Three days; Instructor-led
> http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/s...2087aFINAL.ASP
>
> I am not aware of any exam/course for SQL Server 2000 Clustering but the
following books/whitepapers/webcast should be a good starting point
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability (MS Press)
> ISBN 0-7356-1920-4
> Microsoft Whitepaper - SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering
>
http://www.microsoft.com/SQL/techinf...vercluster.asp
> SQL Server 2000 Pricing and Licensing
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobu...rlicensing.asp
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 High Availability Series
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/sqlhalp.mspx
> Microsoft Webcasts
> Introduction to Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Clustering
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb051001.asp
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server: Things You Should Know
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb032602.asp
>
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server Basic Setup, Maintenance, and
Service Pack
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb061002.asp
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering Disaster Recovery Procedures
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb101802.asp
> Troubleshooting SQL 2000 Virtual Server and Service Pack Setups for
Failover Clustering
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb020703.asp
>
> Microsoft Knowledge Base Articles
>
> Q243218 INF: Installation Order for SQL 2000 Enterprise Edition
> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=243218
> Q260758 - INF: Frequently Asked Questions - SQL Server 2000 - Failover
Clustering
> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=260758
> 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
>
>

Cluster testing

I need to setup a 2 node cluster for testing.
I have 2 identical servers running Win2k3, but I have a question about the
shared disk device.
For the shared disk can I use a NAS device, one that connects thru a cat5,
or do I need a device that uses scsi?
Remember this is for a short term test.
Thanks
SQL Clustering won't support NAS. SCSI would work, but why not try Virtual
Server 2005? That works great!
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
"dutch" <dutch@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2CCAEA46-6F5F-44D6-86A1-5BBAD07F8B18@.microsoft.com...
>I need to setup a 2 node cluster for testing.
> I have 2 identical servers running Win2k3, but I have a question about the
> shared disk device.
> For the shared disk can I use a NAS device, one that connects thru a cat5,
> or do I need a device that uses scsi?
> Remember this is for a short term test.
> Thanks
sql sql

Cluster synchronize

I have an architecture which has 4 DB servers on the whole; two will
participate in load balancing and other two in fail over clustering.
My question is how will the two DB servers that is used for load
balancing synchronize?
Hi
To synchronize the data between the 2 clusters, you need to use something
like replication. Clustering is not a load-balancing technology.
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/
<mukesh.thiru@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1135764099.960391.227140@.g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>I have an architecture which has 4 DB servers on the whole; two will
> participate in load balancing and other two in fail over clustering.
> My question is how will the two DB servers that is used for load
> balancing synchronize?
>
|||Clustering is also not compatible with Windows Load Balancing, so you would
need to use a hardware based load balancer.
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:eQ%23n4Y6CGHA.620@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> To synchronize the data between the 2 clusters, you need to use something
> like replication. Clustering is not a load-balancing technology.
> 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/
> <mukesh.thiru@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1135764099.960391.227140@.g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
|||mukesh.thiru@.gmail.com wrote:
> I have an architecture which has 4 DB servers on the whole; two will
> participate in load balancing and other two in fail over clustering.
> My question is how will the two DB servers that is used for load
> balancing synchronize?
If you are using SQL server 2005, you might want to consider using read
only shared databases for your reporting . Using a shared file system,
all the nodes can see the same database files which are read only, and
mount the database as read only. You could run reporting quaries
against up to 16 nodes archiving close to 16X speedup.
If your update cycle and reporting cycle do not overlap, switching
between the read write to read only (and back) takes about 20 seconds.
Note that no replication is needed and no storage space is wasted.
Tomer Meshorer
Database Engineer
Polyserve Inc (http://www.polyserve.com)
Email:tmeshorer@.polyserve.com
|||I'd very strongly disagree with that assessment. It isn't a shared file
system, it requires a SAN.
Additionally, just because you point 2 SQL Server instances at the same
database does not mean you get 2X performance improvement, just like
pointing 16 instances at a single database will not give you 16X
performance. You could in fact see your performance degrade. The only way
that your performance would improve is if you have queries running on each
instance that are not competing with each other for disk throughput. If
there is disk contention, your performance will degrade since a single set
of disks are now servicing requests from multiple instances at the same
time.
Read only, shared databases is a nice new feature, but any performance
benefit you may get is very highly dependent upon your query patterns, the
volume of data in your active working set, and the amount of physical data
you can cache in memory on each instance.
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"tmeshorer" <tmeshorer@.polyserve.com> wrote in message
news:1135935720.275938.306680@.g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> mukesh.thiru@.gmail.com wrote:
> If you are using SQL server 2005, you might want to consider using read
> only shared databases for your reporting . Using a shared file system,
> all the nodes can see the same database files which are read only, and
> mount the database as read only. You could run reporting quaries
> against up to 16 nodes archiving close to 16X speedup.
> If your update cycle and reporting cycle do not overlap, switching
> between the read write to read only (and back) takes about 20 seconds.
> Note that no replication is needed and no storage space is wasted.
>
> Tomer Meshorer
> Database Engineer
> Polyserve Inc (http://www.polyserve.com)
> Email:tmeshorer@.polyserve.com
>
|||Your scenario is correct on a specific context. Vis you have an I/O
bottleneck
However, this is customer specific.
In cases where you have a CPU bottleneck (usually occurs in DW type of
quaries,which tends to do sequential I/O) the suggested solution will
scale close to linear(at least as observed in internal benchmarks where
I/O was not a bottleneck)
What I am suggesting, and specifically in the context of reporting, is
an alternative way for scaling SQL server.
Currently the only way to scale is up, which become very costly when
you go to the 8,16,32 CPU boxes.
In addition, you cannot scale economically since you move in increments
of 2^n each time you want to decrease your reporting time (and move
exponentially in price)
Note that in both scenarios (scale up to big SMP, or scale out on a
shared file system cluster) if you have an I/O bottleneck you reach the
state as described in your email.
However scaling out is more economically sound (assuming that you do
not have I/O bottle neck) since:
1. It is much cheaper
2. Pay as you go
3. No storage duplication
4. No changes to the database configuration(I.e. no need for
replication).
Best,
Tomer Meshorer
Database Engineer
Polyserve Inc
|||My only point was that you stated that you would get a 16X performance
improvement by using this when you deploy on 16 machines. That statement is
100% false and we both know it. You get ZERO performance improvement. Not
a single, solitary second of improved performance. A query running on the
operational system and taking 10 seconds is going to take 10 seconds to
complete if you are using a scalable shared database model.
Do not mix improved performance with the ability to execute more read only
queries per unit time. It is NOT the same thing and is an incredibly
misleading statement. It is misleading statements like that which lead to
people implementing things and then saying that "SQL Server can't scale" or
"SQL Server can't perform", because they are trying to make a feature do
something that it was not designed to do and never had the possibility of
doing in the first place.
You CAN be increased throughput and you CAN get increased capacity by being
able to run many more of these 10 second queries simultaneously when they
are executed against multiple machines. The ONLY time that you get
increased throughput (more queries per second) or increased capacity (more
queries per second) is if you hae a VERY specific situation where memory or
CPU is the ONLY bottleneck. In those situations, you can get increased
throughput or capacity, BUT, you do NOT and never will get a linear
increase in query capacity. The amount of increased capacity is VERY highly
dependent upon your database design, the volume of data you are working
with, and query patterns.
You cited DW type of queries. There is no such thing. You either have
queries that perform sequential I/O or queries performing random I/O.
Giving it a fancy name doesn't change it, because you run both types of
queries in every operational system. So, let's look at a CPU contrained
query. We have system where we have 4 processors and 4 GB of RAM. Queries
executing against the 400GB of data within the database normally take 15
minutes to execute and pull as much as 3 GB of data. We have isolated the
issue to CPU bottlenecks and moved the system to an 8 processor machine,
thereby doubling the CPU capacity. We observed that the execution time of
this query drops to 11 minutes whereby, we found that memory became the
bottleneck in the system. We doubled the RAM to 8GB and found that the
query execution only dropped to 10 minutes. Both memory and CPU became
bottlenecks at that point, because we were all of a sudden executing more
queries per unit time and 3 simultaneously executing queries would saturate
our memory. This would cause pages to be ejected from the cache (incurring
additional processor overhead). More pages would have to be read from disk
(more processor overhead). We quickly found out that it if we increased the
processor or memory capacity, we would then shift the bottleneck to the I/O
subsystem.
Sure, you can craft testing matrices and benchmarks that will say that
scalable, shared databases will get you a nearly linear scaling. (VERY
important to note that the word is SCALING, NOT performance improvement.)
For every scenario that you come up which exhibits this behavior, I can
change it a hundred different ways to cause the performance to degrade
either by changing the query pattern, introducing a new query, changing the
indexing, increasing the data volume, changing query parameters, etc.
It is a nice technology that has a VERY specific use in an environment
experiencing VERY specific scalability issues. Unless you have done a full
analysis on the system to determine whether it is appropriate, implementing
this technology would be a very big mistake. It most definitely isn't going
to produce a linear scaling and there is a reason that Microsoft is not
giving any specific numbers. (The instant they publish numbers like you
have, there are going to be several thousand people handing evidence that
the findings are not correct.)
This very specific issue is what makes all of the Oracle marketing and sales
surrounding RAC a complete joke. Oracle RAC won't produce a linear scaling
for exactly the same reasons that Scalable Shared Databases won't produce a
linear scaling. If your query pattern, active data volumes, and bottlenecks
meet a VERY specific profile then these types of technologies will get you
increased SCALABILITY. (That does NOT mean you get improved performance.)
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"tmeshorer" <tmeshorer@.polyserve.com> wrote in message
news:1136012125.047011.237960@.g47g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Your scenario is correct on a specific context. Vis you have an I/O
> bottleneck
> However, this is customer specific.
> In cases where you have a CPU bottleneck (usually occurs in DW type of
> quaries,which tends to do sequential I/O) the suggested solution will
> scale close to linear(at least as observed in internal benchmarks where
> I/O was not a bottleneck)
> What I am suggesting, and specifically in the context of reporting, is
> an alternative way for scaling SQL server.
> Currently the only way to scale is up, which become very costly when
> you go to the 8,16,32 CPU boxes.
> In addition, you cannot scale economically since you move in increments
> of 2^n each time you want to decrease your reporting time (and move
> exponentially in price)
> Note that in both scenarios (scale up to big SMP, or scale out on a
> shared file system cluster) if you have an I/O bottleneck you reach the
> state as described in your email.
> However scaling out is more economically sound (assuming that you do
> not have I/O bottle neck) since:
> 1. It is much cheaper
> 2. Pay as you go
> 3. No storage duplication
> 4. No changes to the database configuration(I.e. no need for
> replication).
> Best,
> Tomer Meshorer
> Database Engineer
> Polyserve Inc
>
|||I should have clarified my point. I am looking at the actual wall clock
time that it takes to run a reporting job. I also assume that you have
more queries than servers, which I think would be the case for a
typical reporting job.
So from a wall clock time perspective, you will be able to get close to
X#server execution time improvement. I.e. if you are CPU constrained, a
6 hour job with 6 queries on one server can be reduced to 1 hour job on
6 servers.
If you have an I/O bottleneck there are two cases. If you are storage
constrained that this is a natural case. Vis, it does not matter if you
have 4*2 way servers or one 8 way server. If you are internal I/O BUS
constrains (e.g. PCI Express) moving to 4*2 way might improve your
situation since now you have 4 internal buses in your disposal.
However, I do not agree with your other point that this is very
specific situation. I think that you will encounter this situation at
the same probability that you will encounter any other kind of
bottleneck (which is about 1/3 of the cases). However, as your example
describe, to move out of the "CPU as a bottleneck" state into "I/O as
bottleneck state" you have to scale up. Based on your example, your
customer had to scale up from 4 way to 8 way.
Now lets say that you paid the money and now you are I/O constrained.
Ok, you buy more disks, change your RAID method, etc. Time passes and
you are again constrained by the CPU... are you going to move to 16
way?, 32 way? 64 way ?
My point is that if you do not have CPU bottleneck now, you will be
after you solve your current bottleneck. I.e. this is not VERY specific
scenario but rather a common one.
Tomer Meshorer
Database Engineer
Polyserve Inc (www.polyserve.com)
|||So that means that I can put 9 women to work and produce a baby in 1 month?
Mike
Mentor
Solid Quality Learning
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
"tmeshorer" <tmeshorer@.polyserve.com> wrote in message
news:1136319106.372823.46070@.o13g2000cwo.googlegro ups.com...
>I should have clarified my point. I am looking at the actual wall clock
> time that it takes to run a reporting job. I also assume that you have
> more queries than servers, which I think would be the case for a
> typical reporting job.
> So from a wall clock time perspective, you will be able to get close to
> X#server execution time improvement. I.e. if you are CPU constrained, a
> 6 hour job with 6 queries on one server can be reduced to 1 hour job on
> 6 servers.
> If you have an I/O bottleneck there are two cases. If you are storage
> constrained that this is a natural case. Vis, it does not matter if you
> have 4*2 way servers or one 8 way server. If you are internal I/O BUS
> constrains (e.g. PCI Express) moving to 4*2 way might improve your
> situation since now you have 4 internal buses in your disposal.
> However, I do not agree with your other point that this is very
> specific situation. I think that you will encounter this situation at
> the same probability that you will encounter any other kind of
> bottleneck (which is about 1/3 of the cases). However, as your example
> describe, to move out of the "CPU as a bottleneck" state into "I/O as
> bottleneck state" you have to scale up. Based on your example, your
> customer had to scale up from 4 way to 8 way.
> Now lets say that you paid the money and now you are I/O constrained.
> Ok, you buy more disks, change your RAID method, etc. Time passes and
> you are again constrained by the CPU... are you going to move to 16
> way?, 32 way? 64 way ?
> My point is that if you do not have CPU bottleneck now, you will be
> after you solve your current bottleneck. I.e. this is not VERY specific
> scenario but rather a common one.
> Tomer Meshorer
> Database Engineer
> Polyserve Inc (www.polyserve.com)
>
|||No. What I suggest is "Concurrent " execution, I.e. wall time speed up.
However, I cannot formulate and answer using babies and women while
staying
politically correct :-)
Tomer Meshorer
Database Engineer
Polyserve Inc (www.polyserve.com)

Cluster Switch Hardware

New to clustering and wanted to know if anyone had any hardware suggestions
with regard to the dedicated switch for the heartbeat network.
Initially this will be a 2 node Active/Active cluster hosting SQL Server
connected to a SAN. I do expect to add at least another set of clustered
hosts or two before year's end.
We typically use all Cisco equipment.
Suggestions?
"john d" <johnd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D9FCFA8C-13FB-4A7C-9E88-9573BEF9C047@.microsoft.com...
> New to clustering and wanted to know if anyone had any hardware
> suggestions
> with regard to the dedicated switch for the heartbeat network.
Anything will work for you. I, personally, prefer dumb hubs. That way Bucky
can misconfigure it and hose up my heartbeat network.
Russ Kaufmann
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
ClusterHelp.com, a Microsoft Certified Gold Partner
Web http://www.clusterhelp.com
Blog http://msmvps.com/clusterhelp
The next ClusterHelp classes are:
Denver starting Feb 12th
NYC starting Feb 19th
|||I agree with Russ. The bandwith requirements for the heartbeat are really
low. I wish I could get some old co-ax NICS and just run a single cable
instead of an active device.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Russ Kaufmann [MVP]" <russ@.clusterhelp.com> wrote in message
news:erF4iczOHHA.4280@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> "john d" <johnd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D9FCFA8C-13FB-4A7C-9E88-9573BEF9C047@.microsoft.com...
> Anything will work for you. I, personally, prefer dumb hubs. That way
> Bucky can misconfigure it and hose up my heartbeat network.
>
> --
> Russ Kaufmann
> MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
> ClusterHelp.com, a Microsoft Certified Gold Partner
> Web http://www.clusterhelp.com
> Blog http://msmvps.com/clusterhelp
> The next ClusterHelp classes are:
> Denver starting Feb 12th
> NYC starting Feb 19th
>
|||Geoff/Russ - Thanks for your input. Glad I didn't already go out and buy a
switch.
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> I agree with Russ. The bandwith requirements for the heartbeat are really
> low. I wish I could get some old co-ax NICS and just run a single cable
> instead of an active device.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Russ Kaufmann [MVP]" <russ@.clusterhelp.com> wrote in message
> news:erF4iczOHHA.4280@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
|||For a 2-node system, we typically use just a network cross-over cable. If
you expand this cluster for additional nodes, the heartbeat uses multi-cast
to communicate (Win2K3); so, you will definitely want to isolate this
network from the others, either by constructing a physical interconnect
between the servers or through a larger corporate switch interconnect and
the use of VLANs.
Regardless, unless you also duplicate the hardware, this network will also
represent a Single Point of Failure. If you are unfamiliar with this term,
you should learn it. It is the single most important concept with regards
to Highly Available systems.
In this case, you must provide multiple network paths between the servers.
In addition to the dedicated heartbeat network, we typically allow the
public network to also transport cluster heartbeat communications. In
Cluster Administrator, on the cluster object, you can specify the network
priority for cluster communications, but also include the secondary network
as a fail-safe.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"john d" <johnd@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DC09A8BC-4126-4002-B526-401B90D2A1DB@.microsoft.com...
> Geoff/Russ - Thanks for your input. Glad I didn't already go out and buy
a[vbcol=seagreen]
> switch.
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
really[vbcol=seagreen]

cluster SSAS and SQL

Hi,
We have a default clusterd SQL server 2005 with sp2 installed in one cluster
group and then I have installed a default SSAS clustered instance in another
cluster group and it works fine (can failover and user can connect). However,
when I applying the sp2 to SSAS instance (with SSAS checked only) and it
failed; it not noly just failed but also take down my default clustered sql
server! We have to call MS to get our server up. It seems that, somehow,
registry for default sql server got messed up by SSAS sp2. My question are:
1.Is it possible or supported to install a default SQL server and a default
Analysis server on a cluster (each one in its own cluster group) with sp2;
2.why applying sp2 on a default AD instance in one cluster group affect a
default sql instance in another cluster group.
thanks much in advance.
Zack.
The answer is that SQL services share some common components. Plus, the
installer has some generic setup logic. Finally, are you using the same
service account for both services? If so, then permissions can get hosed
during a broken update.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"dp" <dp@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:90BAC728-916F-4497-B293-55920962EDE8@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We have a default clusterd SQL server 2005 with sp2 installed in one
> cluster
> group and then I have installed a default SSAS clustered instance in
> another
> cluster group and it works fine (can failover and user can connect).
> However,
> when I applying the sp2 to SSAS instance (with SSAS checked only) and it
> failed; it not noly just failed but also take down my default clustered
> sql
> server! We have to call MS to get our server up. It seems that, somehow,
> registry for default sql server got messed up by SSAS sp2. My question
> are:
> 1. Is it possible or supported to install a default SQL server and a
> default
> Analysis server on a cluster (each one in its own cluster group) with sp2;
> 2. why applying sp2 on a default AD instance in one cluster group affect a
> default sql instance in another cluster group.
> thanks much in advance.
> Zack.
>
|||Zack, were you ever able to upgrade your SSAS in the cluster?
We are having the same or similar issues. We upgraded our cluster from SP1
to SP2. The SQL Server components upgraded to SP2, but the SSAS failed and
is still at SP1. After the upgrade one of our clustered instances did not
come back online. Error logs read something like, "...Cluster IP/Network
resource already in use..."
Well, I called MS because our production SQL 2005 cluster was hosed. The
issue, reg key "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microso ft SQL
Server\MSSQL.1\Cluster\ClusterName" had the incorrect instance name for the
MSSQL.1 instance (in our case). We had to run some cluster commands to
remove the MSCS checkpoint, changed the key value to the correct instance
name, then reapply MSCS checkpoint.
This got our SQL Server instance back online. But we still can't update
SSAS to SP2. Maybe the two issues are not related, but I have a gut feeling
they are. The incorrect 'ClusterName' value happened to be the instance name
for our SSAS.
I still have the MS support ticket open trying to determine if the cluster
registry keys are in the correct state on both nodes.
Anyone else having issues with failover cluster anaylsis server upgrade to
SP2?
"dp" wrote:

> Hi,
> We have a default clusterd SQL server 2005 with sp2 installed in one cluster
> group and then I have installed a default SSAS clustered instance in another
> cluster group and it works fine (can failover and user can connect). However,
> when I applying the sp2 to SSAS instance (with SSAS checked only) and it
> failed; it not noly just failed but also take down my default clustered sql
> server! We have to call MS to get our server up. It seems that, somehow,
> registry for default sql server got messed up by SSAS sp2. My question are:
> 1.Is it possible or supported to install a default SQL server and a default
> Analysis server on a cluster (each one in its own cluster group) with sp2;
> 2.why applying sp2 on a default AD instance in one cluster group affect a
> default sql instance in another cluster group.
> thanks much in advance.
> Zack.
>

cluster sql2000 & DTC

on the passive node i tried to set range port for DTC
I tried using dcomcnfg, but when i reboot the node cannot join the cluster.
Why ?
thanks in advance.
Regards,
Dario
Review the NT event logs and cluster.log to get more details on why the node failed to join the cluster.
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
|||DTC by deault will use any port ranges.
a registry hack can be done to limit it to certain range of ports.
"Dario Sala" wrote:

> on the passive node i tried to set range port for DTC
> I tried using dcomcnfg, but when i reboot the node cannot join the cluster.
> Why ?
> thanks in advance.
> Regards,
> Dario
>
>

cluster sql server 2000

Hi,

I need manuals, tecnical papres, instalation guide, etc about
how to install one cluster sql server 2000 64 bits with
windows server 2003.

It`s posible a need one document step by step about this

Thanks,

RaulGZ."raulgz" <ragaza@.ozu.es> wrote in message
news:9b551742.0402270130.5c1c5655@.posting.google.c om...
> Hi,
> I need manuals, tecnical papres, instalation guide, etc about
> how to install one cluster sql server 2000 64 bits with
> windows server 2003.
> It`s posible a need one document step by step about this
>
> Thanks,
> RaulGZ.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tr...at/failclus.asp

Simonsql sql

Cluster SQL Active-Active

My friends:
I need document information about the installation process of SQL in Cluster
with two instances, both active, one in each Server. In summary I want to
install a Cluster of SQL Active-Active, for take greater benefit of both
Cluster nodes.
Even though I have looked for in BOL (follow the recommendations of Maxi), I
had investigate and knock the same trouble, there are only information about
the Active-Pasive installation, and I'll wish a procedure or document about
Active-Active setup and installation.
If someone knows where I can find the information, or somebody understand
about Active-Active installation, please give it me know. Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Carlo Sorrel
Hello Carlo,
Once you have installed the first instance of virtual SQL Server 2000 then the steps for installing the second instance of virtual SQL Server 2000 is exactly the same. The second virtual instance of SQL Server 2000
will need a seperate shared drive (you cannot use the shared drive that you used for the first instance), unique SQL IP Address (again you cannot use the one you used for your windows cluster ip or the first sql
server ip) and unique SQL network name. Also, if the first virtual instance is a default instance then the second instance can ONLY be a named instance. You CANNOT have two default virtual SQL Server 2000
instance on the same cluster. To have both the instances similar, many customers install both instances of virtual SQL Server 2000 as named instances.
Since you have multiple instances (2 in your case), you will need to ensure that all server nodes have the same resources (processor, memory) and it is enough to handle the instances that could potentially fail to
that node. Another important consideration is to cap memory usage of the instance of SQL Server 2000 with max server memory. Especially if AWE memory is enabled, max server memory must be set in a
multiple-instance cluster to prevent starving the server node.
If you have a Windows Server 2003 EE cluster then you may find the following webcast useful
TechNet Support WebCast: How to install a Microsoft SQL Server 2000 virtual server on a Microsoft Windows Server 2003 cluster
Discusses how to install Microsoft SQL Server 2000 clustering on Microsoft Windows Server 2003 and differences between Microsoft Windows 2000 Server and Windows Server 2003.
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;888121
For Win2K Adv Server cluster, you may find the following whitepaper useful
SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../failclus.mspx
Review the above and feel free to post any other qs that you may have.
Additional Information
=======================
Here is some other related links that you may find useful
INF: Clustered SQL Server Do's, Don'ts, and Basic Warnings
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=254321
Introduction to Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Clustering
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb051001.asp
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server: Things You Should Know
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb032602.asp
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server Basic Setup, Maintenance, and Service Pack http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb061002.asp
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering Disaster Recovery Procedures
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb101802.asp
Troubleshooting SQL 2000 Virtual Server and Service Pack Setups for Failover Clustering
http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb020703.asp
HTH,
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
|||Hi
Just be aware, Active-Active does not mean load balancing. It means 2
instances of different databases, each running by default on one of the
nodes of a cluster.
The references Uttam has supplied are great and will help you along.
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/
"Carlo Sorrel" <csorrel@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:#nPFJo7AFHA.3576@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> My friends:
>
> I need document information about the installation process of SQL in
Cluster
> with two instances, both active, one in each Server. In summary I want to
> install a Cluster of SQL Active-Active, for take greater benefit of both
> Cluster nodes.
>
> Even though I have looked for in BOL (follow the recommendations of Maxi),
I
> had investigate and knock the same trouble, there are only information
about
> the Active-Pasive installation, and I'll wish a procedure or document
about
> Active-Active setup and installation.
>
> If someone knows where I can find the information, or somebody understand
> about Active-Active installation, please give it me know. Thanks a lot.
>
> Regards,
>
> Carlo Sorrel
>
|||first, sorry my english..., apears this error during instalattion the second instance on Cluster Windows 2003.
The description for Event ID ( 17052 ) in Source ( MSSQL$LASCAR ) cannot be found. The local computer may not have the necessary registry information or message DLL files to display messages from a remote computer. You may be able to use the /AUXSOURCE= flag to retrieve this description; see Help and Support for details. The following information is part of the event: [sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = 01000; native error = 35; message = [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][DBNETLIB]ConnectionOpen (Connect()).
Tahnk's.
Carlo Sorrel.
"Uttam Parui[MS]" <uttamkp@.online.microsoft.com> escribi en el mensaje news:uX597q8AFHA.1680@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl...
> Hello Carlo,
> Once you have installed the first instance of virtual SQL Server 2000 then the steps for installing the second instance of virtual SQL Server 2000 is exactly the same. The second virtual instance of SQL Server 2000
> will need a seperate shared drive (you cannot use the shared drive that you used for the first instance), unique SQL IP Address (again you cannot use the one you used for your windows cluster ip or the first sql
> server ip) and unique SQL network name. Also, if the first virtual instance is a default instance then the second instance can ONLY be a named instance. You CANNOT have two default virtual SQL Server 2000
> instance on the same cluster. To have both the instances similar, many customers install both instances of virtual SQL Server 2000 as named instances.
> Since you have multiple instances (2 in your case), you will need to ensure that all server nodes have the same resources (processor, memory) and it is enough to handle the instances that could potentially fail to
> that node. Another important consideration is to cap memory usage of the instance of SQL Server 2000 with max server memory. Especially if AWE memory is enabled, max server memory must be set in a
> multiple-instance cluster to prevent starving the server node.
> If you have a Windows Server 2003 EE cluster then you may find the following webcast useful
> TechNet Support WebCast: How to install a Microsoft SQL Server 2000 virtual server on a Microsoft Windows Server 2003 cluster
> Discusses how to install Microsoft SQL Server 2000 clustering on Microsoft Windows Server 2003 and differences between Microsoft Windows 2000 Server and Windows Server 2003.
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;888121
>
> For Win2K Adv Server cluster, you may find the following whitepaper useful
> SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../failclus.mspx
> Review the above and feel free to post any other qs that you may have.
> Additional Information
> =======================
> Here is some other related links that you may find useful
> INF: Clustered SQL Server Do's, Don'ts, and Basic Warnings
> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=254321
> Introduction to Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Clustering
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb051001.asp
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server: Things You Should Know
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb032602.asp
>
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Virtual Server Basic Setup, Maintenance, and Service Pack http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb061002.asp
> Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering Disaster Recovery Procedures
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb101802.asp
> Troubleshooting SQL 2000 Virtual Server and Service Pack Setups for Failover Clustering
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...lurb020703.asp
>
> HTH,
> 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
>

Cluster SQL 7.0 in W2KAdv environment

Hi!
This is the scenario:
* Windows 2000 Advanced Server clustered with 2 nodes
After the installation of SQLServer in the first node, does not appear
the 'SQL Server Failover Cluster' or 'Failover Cluster Wizard' in the
program files menu, and the option 'MSDTC Administrative Control' is
in the menu but the file 'dac.exe' isn't installed.
I don't know which is the problem, because the MSDTC resource in the
cluster is on-line and managed by the firt node, after execute the
command comclust. I see the articles in Microsoft KB (290624, 243204,
), but I don't found a solutions. There are a special SQL 7.0 version
for clustering
Thanks!!
Are you sure you installed the Enterprise Edition?
Look at the SQL Server errorlog and verify that you installed the
Enterprise Edition. BAsed on what you are saying about the Failover Wizard
not being there I am thinking that you did not.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
|||I fix this problem by installing the Enterprise Edition (really stupid

), and now the Failover Wizard it's ok, but the 'MSDTC
Administrative Console' still not work. I don't know the reason why
don't install dac.exe. I'll try to install mdac2.8
Thanks for your post.
Regards,
Ren
rboyd@.onlinemicrosoft.com (Rand Boyd [MSFT]) wrote in message news:<CxzmcDlJEHA.4016@.cpmsftngxa10.phx.gbl>...
> Are you sure you installed the Enterprise Edition?
> Look at the SQL Server errorlog and verify that you installed the
> Enterprise Edition. BAsed on what you are saying about the Failover Wizard
> not being there I am thinking that you did not.
> Rand
> This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

Cluster SQL 2000 errorlog problem

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Cluster SQL 2000 errorlog problem

We've recently installed a couple of Windows Server 2003 Ent Ed servers with
SQL 2000 Ent Ed and one of the active/active nodes continually gives the
error below in the Application Event log.
The NT user which was used to install the server and owns the directories
and files below has full rights so this should not be an issue.
I've checked MSDN, etc. but nothing which seems to help.
Thanks.
Ron
--
17050 :
initerrlog: Could not open error log file 'D:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL\log\ERRORLOG'. Operating system error = 3(The system cannot find
the path specified.).
--Ron,
Is drive D local to the server or on the cluster's shared drives? The error
message could be implying that the node in question was installed with the
data files on a local drive.
Hope this helps,
Ron
--
Ron Talmage
SQL Server MVP
"Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7BABBA49-964A-4422-ACB8-B559661A5F05@.microsoft.com...
> We've recently installed a couple of Windows Server 2003 Ent Ed servers
with
> SQL 2000 Ent Ed and one of the active/active nodes continually gives the
> error below in the Application Event log.
> The NT user which was used to install the server and owns the directories
> and files below has full rights so this should not be an issue.
> I've checked MSDN, etc. but nothing which seems to help.
> Thanks.
> Ron
> --
> 17050 :
> initerrlog: Could not open error log file 'D:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\MSSQL\log\ERRORLOG'. Operating system error = 3(The system cannot
find
> the path specified.).
> --|||BTW, there's a webcast on troubleshooting a SQL Server 2000 cluster install
that contains a lot of detail not available elsewhere:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=/servicedesks/webcasts/wcd020703/wcdblurb020703.asp
Ron
--
Ron Talmage
SQL Server MVP
"Ron Talmage" <rtalmage@.prospice.com> wrote in message
news:%23c46wJI%23EHA.3368@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Ron,
> Is drive D local to the server or on the cluster's shared drives? The
error
> message could be implying that the node in question was installed with the
> data files on a local drive.
> Hope this helps,
> Ron
> --
> Ron Talmage
> SQL Server MVP
> "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7BABBA49-964A-4422-ACB8-B559661A5F05@.microsoft.com...
> > We've recently installed a couple of Windows Server 2003 Ent Ed servers
> with
> > SQL 2000 Ent Ed and one of the active/active nodes continually gives the
> > error below in the Application Event log.
> >
> > The NT user which was used to install the server and owns the
directories
> > and files below has full rights so this should not be an issue.
> >
> > I've checked MSDN, etc. but nothing which seems to help.
> > Thanks.
> > Ron
> >
> > --
> > 17050 :
> > initerrlog: Could not open error log file 'D:\Program Files\Microsoft
SQL
> > Server\MSSQL\log\ERRORLOG'. Operating system error = 3(The system cannot
> find
> > the path specified.).
> >
> > --
>|||Ron,
I'll review the webcast...thanks!
SQL Server is installed on the C: drive, the data files are installed on D:
which is a SAN drive share.
I've rebooted both nodes and only started node1...with node2 offline, there
errors are not appearing in the event logs...? Seems odd as it's node1 which
is logging the errors...any other ideas?
Thanks.
Ron
"Ron Talmage" wrote:
> BTW, there's a webcast on troubleshooting a SQL Server 2000 cluster install
> that contains a lot of detail not available elsewhere:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=/servicedesks/webcasts/wcd020703/wcdblurb020703.asp
> Ron
> --
> Ron Talmage
> SQL Server MVP
> "Ron Talmage" <rtalmage@.prospice.com> wrote in message
> news:%23c46wJI%23EHA.3368@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > Ron,
> >
> > Is drive D local to the server or on the cluster's shared drives? The
> error
> > message could be implying that the node in question was installed with the
> > data files on a local drive.
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> > Ron
> > --
> > Ron Talmage
> > SQL Server MVP
> >
> > "Ron" <Ron@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:7BABBA49-964A-4422-ACB8-B559661A5F05@.microsoft.com...
> > > We've recently installed a couple of Windows Server 2003 Ent Ed servers
> > with
> > > SQL 2000 Ent Ed and one of the active/active nodes continually gives the
> > > error below in the Application Event log.
> > >
> > > The NT user which was used to install the server and owns the
> directories
> > > and files below has full rights so this should not be an issue.
> > >
> > > I've checked MSDN, etc. but nothing which seems to help.
> > > Thanks.
> > > Ron
> > >
> > > --
> > > 17050 :
> > > initerrlog: Could not open error log file 'D:\Program Files\Microsoft
> SQL
> > > Server\MSSQL\log\ERRORLOG'. Operating system error = 3(The system cannot
> > find
> > > the path specified.).
> > >
> > > --
> >
> >
>
>sql sql

Cluster SQL 2000

My cu has the Win2003 Cluster 4 nodes with 1 Default and 3 Named instances
SQL 2000, each instance is on different node, we noticed that every
instances have configured with TCP port 1433.
Is it possible on Cluster?
Hello.K
Since SQL uses 1433 as the default port and each instance sounds like its
running on its own node, I would say yes?
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering
"kersob" <lkm> wrote in message
news:ODcWDPdWEHA.3016@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> My cu has the Win2003 Cluster 4 nodes with 1 Default and 3 Named instances
> SQL 2000, each instance is on different node, we noticed that every
> instances have configured with TCP port 1433.
> Is it possible on Cluster?
>
> Hello.K
>
|||Host nodes don't have anything to do with port numbers. Notice that each
SQL resource group (virtual server) has its own IP address and network name.
Therefore, you can have each instance on 1433 if you desire. HOWEVER, there
are some gotchas. If you are hoping to connect to VirtualServername rather
than VirtualServerName\InstanceName, it won't work with anything higher than
MDAC 2.6. Even if you put a named instance on 1433, the client library
'knows' it isn't the default instance. MDAC will report an error that you
are connecting to the wrong instance.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"kersob" <lkm> wrote in message
news:ODcWDPdWEHA.3016@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> My cu has the Win2003 Cluster 4 nodes with 1 Default and 3 Named instances
> SQL 2000, each instance is on different node, we noticed that every
> instances have configured with TCP port 1433.
> Is it possible on Cluster?
>
> Hello.K
>

Cluster solution certification

Hi All,
We are currently working on setting up a 2-Node cluster using SQL Server
2005.
Hardware :
HP Blade servers : BL 460c (c7000 enclosure)
SAN from Compellent Technologies
Fiber channel network.
OS : Windows Server 2003.
My understanding is that this cluster solution (as a whole not individual
components)needs to be certified by Microsoft in order to get support from
them in the future.
I checked the microsoft site www.windowsservercatalog.com but couldn;t find
the entire system as a whole for the above combination. There were other
combinations of SAN from Compellent and Proliant servers from HP.
I spoke to Compellent, and they directed me to the "wondowsservercatalog"
site.
I'm trying to get hold of someone from HP who can help me with this ,so far
no success.
Does anyone of you use the above platform for Clustering without any issues.
If so, for how long?
I appreciate your input.
SJ
Blade cluster = Low Availability Cluster, regardless of the certification.
Blades share too many critical components (Power Supplies, inbuilt network
switches, etc.) for me to count them as truly redundant solutions. Some
blade systems are less "interdependent" than others, but when you are trying
for both hardware redundancy (Clustering) AND lower cost through combined
hardware (blade platform), something has to give.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior SQL Infrastructure Consultant
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"SJ" <SJ@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C314632E-B342-45E7-86F8-CB0F8F1DD230@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> We are currently working on setting up a 2-Node cluster using SQL Server
> 2005.
> Hardware :
> HP Blade servers : BL 460c (c7000 enclosure)
> SAN from Compellent Technologies
> Fiber channel network.
> OS : Windows Server 2003.
> My understanding is that this cluster solution (as a whole not individual
> components)needs to be certified by Microsoft in order to get support from
> them in the future.
> I checked the microsoft site www.windowsservercatalog.com but couldn;t
> find
> the entire system as a whole for the above combination. There were other
> combinations of SAN from Compellent and Proliant servers from HP.
> I spoke to Compellent, and they directed me to the "wondowsservercatalog"
> site.
> I'm trying to get hold of someone from HP who can help me with this ,so
> far
> no success.
> Does anyone of you use the above platform for Clustering without any
> issues.
> If so, for how long?
> I appreciate your input.
>
> --
> SJ

Cluster Size. Which the best?

Hi all,
Where can I find information about Cluster Size formating?
Which the best choice? (4k, 8k, 16k, 35k, 64k)
Is this depend of DB?
I mean, for only Select choice 8K, for insert 64k...'
Which the best solution?
What Microsoft say?
Thanks,
Daniel BarbosaSQL Server reads the data from the disk in 64K extents, so 64K is a natural
choice for the clustersize. IIRC, you can't defragment an NTFS volume if the
clustersize is larger than 4K, but if you use the disk only for SQL Server,
you can define the files to take up all the available disk space from the
start and you won't have any file fragmentation.
Jacco Schalkwijk
SQL Server MVP
"Daniel Barbosa" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:90C9861E-8ADB-450B-8494-9821C5865369@.microsoft.com...
> Hi all,
> Where can I find information about Cluster Size formating?
> Which the best choice? (4k, 8k, 16k, 35k, 64k)
> Is this depend of DB?
> I mean, for only Select choice 8K, for insert 64k...'
> Which the best solution?
> What Microsoft say?
> Thanks,
> Daniel Barbosa|||64kB or the size of eight 8kB SQL Server data pages is certainly best choice
for large reads but I am not sure that is the best cluster size for all sit
uations. As far I know the topic of the NTFS cluster size has never been inv
estigated maybe because dat
a page size is fixed.
NTFS volumes can be defragmented on Windows Server 2003 (and Windows XP) reg
ardless of the cluster size.
Sinisa Catic
Independent Consultant

cluster shutdown

I have a Compaq DL380 G2 package cluster.
Prior to the Hurricane (scare) for the Houston area, all servers and the
cluster were shutdown/powered down.
I am looking for the proper shutdown/powerup procedure for the cluster.
We had a hard time getting the cluster to be recognized by the server.
Make sure your Domain Controllers and network switches are up and running
before powering up the cluster. The disk array starts first, then one host
node. Take all resource roups except the quorum group offline after the
first node is up. Bring up the second node only after the first node is
operational . Make sure the disk resources and IP addresses shift
correctly, then bring the resource groups online on the corret hosts.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Harold Clemons" <harold@.hal-pc.org> wrote in message
news:OqVZe.32210$S26.11108@.tornado.texas.rr.com...
>I have a Compaq DL380 G2 package cluster.
> Prior to the Hurricane (scare) for the Houston area, all servers and the
> cluster were shutdown/powered down.
> I am looking for the proper shutdown/powerup procedure for the cluster.
> We had a hard time getting the cluster to be recognized by the server.
>

Cluster setup question

Im viewing the Cluster setup instructions at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/howtosql/ht
_clustering_51rm.asp
But it doesnt say where to install SQL. It seems to me that if I wanted to
have an Active/ Passive Cluster I would need to intsall it on both boxes? Is
this correct? Are there better links I should be using?
--
SQL2K SP3
TIA, ChrisRYou begin the installation from the node that currently owns the disk
resource you want SQL data files installed to. You can add additional disk
resources after the installation. The SQL installer adds code automagically
to the nodes you specify, provided they actually exist and are running at
install time. You can add or remove nodes from the SQL installation later
if you need to. Once SQL is installed, there is no difference between
installed nodes except for which one is actually running SQL at a given
moment.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"ChrisR" <bla@.noemail.com> wrote in message
news:ugjtmqZ$EHA.2136@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Im viewing the Cluster setup instructions at:
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/howtosql/ht
> _clustering_51rm.asp
> But it doesnt say where to install SQL. It seems to me that if I wanted to
> have an Active/ Passive Cluster I would need to intsall it on both boxes?
Is
> this correct? Are there better links I should be using?
> --
> SQL2K SP3
> TIA, ChrisR
>|||Well, that is close, but not quite accurate.
Even on a stand-alone installation, when you run the setup dialogue in
interactive mode, all that really happens is that a custom .iss file is
generated from your responses to the questions. Once all of the information
is gathered, setup then executes the setupsql with the newly created
setup.iss file as a parameter.
A cluster install is similar, except the setup.iss is deployed to both
nodes. During the installation, the cluster fails the disk over to each
node so that the individual setup.iss files can be ran against two
independently executed setupsql commands. This creates registry keys.
However, since the first install already created the directory structure,
deployed the binaries, installed the .sql scripts to master, model, and
msdb, this part of the process does not run again a second time. Just the
registry keys, performance counters, and client side tools. And, of course,
the MDAC, which is client side and IS NOT cluster aware.
Also, there is such a thing as the "Primary Node." This is nothing more
than the node from which you started the installation. It does not matter
which node you begin the installation on, as long as it is the node that
currently owns the disk resource you plan on installing SQL Server to.
However, it is important that you keep in mind which node this was.
This node will be the only one that maintains a record of the setup logs.
There is also special CLSIDs that only this node will contain that will not
propagate to the other. The nodes are close to the same configuration, BUT
NOT EXACT. This will be important in the future when you try to add
additional disk resources or swap out old disks for new, if you ever need to
modify or add an additional IP resource, or change the domain the cluster
belongs to. Keeping in mind which node was PRIMARY will only be to your
benefit.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:%23e8GA4Z$EHA.2196@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
You begin the installation from the node that currently owns the disk
resource you want SQL data files installed to. You can add additional disk
resources after the installation. The SQL installer adds code automagically
to the nodes you specify, provided they actually exist and are running at
install time. You can add or remove nodes from the SQL installation later
if you need to. Once SQL is installed, there is no difference between
installed nodes except for which one is actually running SQL at a given
moment.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"ChrisR" <bla@.noemail.com> wrote in message
news:ugjtmqZ$EHA.2136@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Im viewing the Cluster setup instructions at:
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/howtosql/ht
> _clustering_51rm.asp
> But it doesnt say where to install SQL. It seems to me that if I wanted to
> have an Active/ Passive Cluster I would need to intsall it on both boxes?
Is
> this correct? Are there better links I should be using?
> --
> SQL2K SP3
> TIA, ChrisR
>|||I have had to change accounts and add/remove disk resources. As long as I
use the current owner node, everything works fine.
Yes, there are some subtle differences such as log files between nodes but
that is only relevant during installation failure troubleshooting. Once
everythign is running, there is no practical difference between nodes,
unlike SQL 7.0 clustering.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Anthony Thomas" <ALThomas@.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:OfrkU8e$EHA.1084@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Well, that is close, but not quite accurate.
> Even on a stand-alone installation, when you run the setup dialogue in
> interactive mode, all that really happens is that a custom .iss file is
> generated from your responses to the questions. Once all of the
information
> is gathered, setup then executes the setupsql with the newly created
> setup.iss file as a parameter.
> A cluster install is similar, except the setup.iss is deployed to both
> nodes. During the installation, the cluster fails the disk over to each
> node so that the individual setup.iss files can be ran against two
> independently executed setupsql commands. This creates registry keys.
> However, since the first install already created the directory structure,
> deployed the binaries, installed the .sql scripts to master, model, and
> msdb, this part of the process does not run again a second time. Just the
> registry keys, performance counters, and client side tools. And, of
course,
> the MDAC, which is client side and IS NOT cluster aware.
> Also, there is such a thing as the "Primary Node." This is nothing more
> than the node from which you started the installation. It does not matter
> which node you begin the installation on, as long as it is the node that
> currently owns the disk resource you plan on installing SQL Server to.
> However, it is important that you keep in mind which node this was.
> This node will be the only one that maintains a record of the setup logs.
> There is also special CLSIDs that only this node will contain that will
not
> propagate to the other. The nodes are close to the same configuration,
BUT
> NOT EXACT. This will be important in the future when you try to add
> additional disk resources or swap out old disks for new, if you ever need
to
> modify or add an additional IP resource, or change the domain the cluster
> belongs to. Keeping in mind which node was PRIMARY will only be to your
> benefit.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
> news:%23e8GA4Z$EHA.2196@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> You begin the installation from the node that currently owns the disk
> resource you want SQL data files installed to. You can add additional
disk
> resources after the installation. The SQL installer adds code
automagically
> to the nodes you specify, provided they actually exist and are running at
> install time. You can add or remove nodes from the SQL installation later
> if you need to. Once SQL is installed, there is no difference between
> installed nodes except for which one is actually running SQL at a given
> moment.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "ChrisR" <bla@.noemail.com> wrote in message
> news:ugjtmqZ$EHA.2136@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Im viewing the Cluster setup instructions at:
> >
> >
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/howtosql/ht
> > _clustering_51rm.asp
> >
> > But it doesnt say where to install SQL. It seems to me that if I wanted
to
> > have an Active/ Passive Cluster I would need to intsall it on both
boxes?
> Is
> > this correct? Are there better links I should be using?
> >
> > --
> > SQL2K SP3
> >
> > TIA, ChrisR
> >
> >
>sql sql

Thursday, March 29, 2012

cluster white paper

Cluster upgrade/migration issue advice.

Cluster Upgrade SP2 2005

Cluster Upgrade SP2 2005

Cluster Upgrade SP2 2005

Cluster Upgrade

Cluster under sqlserver 2000

Cluster training

Cluster testing

Cluster synchronize

Cluster Switch Hardware

cluster SSAS and SQL

cluster sql2000 & DTC

cluster sql server 2000

Cluster SQL Active-Active

Cluster SQL 7.0 in W2KAdv environment

Cluster SQL 2000 errorlog problem

Cluster SQL 2000 errorlog problem

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Cluster SQL 2000 errorlog problem

Cluster SQL 2000

Cluster solution certification

Cluster Size. Which the best?

cluster shutdown

Cluster setup question

Clearing LOG Files

Blog Archive

About Me