How many SQL 7.0 instances can you install on windows 2000 cluster

Hi,
How many SQL 7.0 instances can you install on windows 2000 cluster?
windows 2000 cluster supports a maximum of 4 nodes.
Regards,
AD
Hi
SQL Server 7.0 only supports 2 nodes in a cluster in an Active/Active
configuration.
If I were you, I would use SQL 2000 clustering. SQL 7.0 clustering was hard
to install and maintain.
Regards
Mike
"AD" wrote:

> Hi,
> How many SQL 7.0 instances can you install on windows 2000 cluster?
> windows 2000 cluster supports a maximum of 4 nodes.
>
> Regards,
> AD

How many SQL 2000 nodes does Microsoft Officially Support on 2003?

I would like to know if I can move my active/passive SQL clusters into a more
cost effective four node cluster (3 active and 1 passive). Is there a matrix
or document somewhere on Microsoft's site that indicates what configurations
are officially supported and considered "best practices"?
I found this document
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...rt4/c1261.mspx
which indicated this configuration is good to go on a Windows 2000
Datacenter OS. I believe the document is dated. With the advent of Server
2003, is a four none cluster supported on 2003 Enterprise? Is there a
document that backs this up?
Continuing on this thread, is there any type of matrix that shows what
Microsoft supports from an OS and Application standpoint for two, four, more
node clusters?
Thank you in advance for any assistance.
- John
You can build a 4 node cluster on Windows 2003 using SQL 2000.
PRB: Virtual SQL Server 2000 installation fails on cluster that has eight
nodes
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/811054/en-us
I have built and operated a 4-node, 3 instance SQL 2000/Windows 2003
Enterprise Edition cluster. The procedures and practices are a bit more
complex than a two-node cluster, but nothing radically different.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"John Robel" <John Robel@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7723B6AA-72AF-4B5B-91E1-7CEF9F19DBC7@.microsoft.com...
>I would like to know if I can move my active/passive SQL clusters into a
>more
> cost effective four node cluster (3 active and 1 passive). Is there a
> matrix
> or document somewhere on Microsoft's site that indicates what
> configurations
> are officially supported and considered "best practices"?
> I found this document
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...rt4/c1261.mspx
> which indicated this configuration is good to go on a Windows 2000
> Datacenter OS. I believe the document is dated. With the advent of
> Server
> 2003, is a four none cluster supported on 2003 Enterprise? Is there a
> document that backs this up?
> Continuing on this thread, is there any type of matrix that shows what
> Microsoft supports from an OS and Application standpoint for two, four,
> more
> node clusters?
> Thank you in advance for any assistance.
> - John
sql

How Many IP(Public & Private) Required for 2 Node Active/Passive Cluster

Hi all,

I have some doubt about the IP Required for configuring cluster(both Window and SQL server)

Details :
-
How Many IP(Public & Private) Required for 2 Node Active/Passive both window and SQL server Cluster ?
IP(Public & Private) Required :

1 : For Window Clustering : 2 node Active/Passive Cluster ? How many ip ?
2 : For Sql Server Clustering : 2 node Active/Passive Cluster ?how many ip ?
3 : Is there any mathematics for that ? How to analyse the IP requirement ?

Thanks

Hi all,

Can u plz.....

sql

How Many IP(Public & Private) Required for 2 Node Active/Passive Cluster

Hi all,

I have some doubt about the IP Required for configuring cluster(both Window and SQL server)

Details :
-
How Many IP(Public & Private) Required for 2 Node Active/Passive both window and SQL server Cluster ?
IP(Public & Private) Required :

1 : For Window Clustering : 2 node Active/Passive Cluster ? How many ip ?
2 : For Sql Server Clustering : 2 node Active/Passive Cluster ?how many ip ?
3 : Is there any mathematics for that ? How to analyse the IP requirement ?

Thanks

Hi all,

Can u plz.....

How many drives can be mapped to 2 SQLServer on cluster

Dear all,

We have just configured a SAN system and 2 SQLServer clustered(A/P).

The vendor has mapped 2 logical drives each one is accessed by each SQLServer

ex:

Logical Drives on SAN :- H: and G:

Server S1 have accesses to H: and Server S2 have accesses to G: but at a time we can see both logical drive on each system but can access there mapped drives.

Is this possible to have 2 logical drives on each server mapped with each other on the cluster server.

Server 1 having drive H: and G:

Server 2 having drive H: and G:

Note : Vendor told us that there is a BUG in SQLServer 2005 that only one drive can be mapped with each sqlserver in a cluster.

Please help

Is there can Document Released from Microsoft Regarding Clusting SQLServer2005 Please the link.

Regards

Mohd Sufian

This is not a bug, but functionality. You can only add one drive to each cluster group. If the drive is already used by one SQL server instance, you can not use the same with other instance.

Here is a webcast on 'How to custer SQL Server 2005':

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/891798

And here is a white paper:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=818234dc-a17b-4f09-b282-c6830fead499&DisplayLang=en

|||This is technically not a problem with SQL. Most SAN's don't allow you to point more than 1 computer to 1 logical volume on the SAN.

how many clusters can i set up ?

A slight confusion. I have created a windows cluster with 2 nodes and a
single instance of SQL 2K cluster
Is it possible to create many windows clusters? I was looking at the Cluster
Admin and there is an option to create a new cluster ... Why would one want
to do that especially with only 2 nodes ? Please let me know. Using windows
2003
One server can only be an active participant in one cluster at a time, but
the cluster administrator tool can be used to manage (and create) all
clusters in your environment. You can have as many clusters in your
environment as you'd like...obviously this is limited to the amount of
hardware that you own.
So, you don't need to run cluster administrator on the nodes that you are
using to form your cluster...it can be run on any host that has the utility
installed (all W2K3 Ent Servers).
Regards,
John
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23FJmV3TLEHA.4080@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> A slight confusion. I have created a windows cluster with 2 nodes and a
> single instance of SQL 2K cluster
> Is it possible to create many windows clusters? I was looking at the
Cluster
> Admin and there is an option to create a new cluster ... Why would one
want
> to do that especially with only 2 nodes ? Please let me know. Using
windows
> 2003
>

How long does it take to startup SQL Service with AWE enabled

Hi,
We have a fail-over cluster with a SQL Server 2000 instance installed on it.
There are 6GB memory available on the cluster, and we have the /PAE switch
turned on. I want to enable AWE in SQL Server and allocate 3-4GB to SQL
server. but from what I read about turn on AWE, some paper warned that the
startup process of SQL service will take a lot longer. Does anybody have
experience about how long it takes to startup SQL in a cluster with AWE
enabled with 3GB memory allocated? And if we experience a timeout error
before SQL Service started, what can we do?
Thanks
Hong Wang
Yes, the failover process will take longer with AWE enabled. The reason is
that the AWE memory must be "zeroed out." This takes extra time. However,
we have found that the Recovery Interval controls most of the failover
timing and that managing the Shared Volumes consumes more time than the AWE
clearing.
With 8 GB RAM, Windows 2000, SQL Server max server memory set to 6.5 GB, a
typical failover for a busy system could take 3 to 5 minutes. The recovery
process could take up to 15 minutes or so on a busy system once services
were restored on the new node.
There is also a KB article that discusses application processes "awareness"
of clustered instances. Basically, the application must use retry logic for
detected database connectivity errors, which can be trapped. However, this
would be good practice even if the database was hosted on a stand-alone
system.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Hong Wang" <HongWang@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4CBDA708-88EF-49F6-A55C-70C3F90F5F1A@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We have a fail-over cluster with a SQL Server 2000 instance installed on
it.
> There are 6GB memory available on the cluster, and we have the /PAE switch
> turned on. I want to enable AWE in SQL Server and allocate 3-4GB to SQL
> server. but from what I read about turn on AWE, some paper warned that the
> startup process of SQL service will take a lot longer. Does anybody have
> experience about how long it takes to startup SQL in a cluster with AWE
> enabled with 3GB memory allocated? And if we experience a timeout error
> before SQL Service started, what can we do?
> Thanks
> Hong Wang