Is it possible to have 2 SQL 2000 (STD) servers access a common RAID
disk containing the database and work concurrently?No.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
news:434E6529.9DBA7366@.hillhouse.ca...
> Is it possible to have 2 SQL 2000 (STD) servers access a common RAID
> disk containing the database and work concurrently?
>
>|||As I suspected - I guess that SQL clustering is the way to go or wait
until SQL 2005 for mirroring
Steve
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> No.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
> news:434E6529.9DBA7366@.hillhouse.ca...
> > Is it possible to have 2 SQL 2000 (STD) servers access a common RAID
> > disk containing the database and work concurrently?
> >
> >
> >|||Clustering is a high availability solution, not a scale-up solution.
Mirroring allows read-only access to the target database.
SQL does not scale out, it scales up.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
news:434E696D.2F79952A@.hillhouse.ca...
> As I suspected - I guess that SQL clustering is the way to go or wait
> until SQL 2005 for mirroring
> Steve
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
>> No.
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Senior Database Administrator
>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>> "Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
>> news:434E6529.9DBA7366@.hillhouse.ca...
>> > Is it possible to have 2 SQL 2000 (STD) servers access a common RAID
>> > disk containing the database and work concurrently?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>|||What I need is a fail-over solution whereby if a sql server has a hardware
failure, another server can continue in its place.
Steve
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> Clustering is a high availability solution, not a scale-up solution.
> Mirroring allows read-only access to the target database.
> SQL does not scale out, it scales up.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> "Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
> news:434E696D.2F79952A@.hillhouse.ca...
> > As I suspected - I guess that SQL clustering is the way to go or wait
> > until SQL 2005 for mirroring
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
> >
> >> No.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Geoff N. Hiten
> >> Senior Database Administrator
> >> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> >> "Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
> >> news:434E6529.9DBA7366@.hillhouse.ca...
> >> > Is it possible to have 2 SQL 2000 (STD) servers access a common RAID
> >> > disk containing the database and work concurrently?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >|||You are looking for failover clustering. You use a highly-redundant disk
array such as a SAN, two or more host computers, and Windows and SQL
Software to build a failover cluster. The systems are physically
interconnected at all times, but the cluster software arbitrates ownership
so only one host computer owns a SQL server instance, and its associated
resources) at any one time.
Here is a good overview on SQL failover clustering
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/failclus.mspx
Here is a good resource on SQL Server High Availability solutions:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/deploy/sqlhalp.mspx
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
news:434F9806.D4DC58BD@.hillhouse.ca...
> What I need is a fail-over solution whereby if a sql server has a hardware
> failure, another server can continue in its place.
> Steve
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
>> Clustering is a high availability solution, not a scale-up solution.
>> Mirroring allows read-only access to the target database.
>> SQL does not scale out, it scales up.
>> --
>> Geoff N. Hiten
>> Senior Database Administrator
>> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>> "Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
>> news:434E696D.2F79952A@.hillhouse.ca...
>> > As I suspected - I guess that SQL clustering is the way to go or wait
>> > until SQL 2005 for mirroring
>> >
>> > Steve
>> >
>> > "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
>> >
>> >> No.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Geoff N. Hiten
>> >> Senior Database Administrator
>> >> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>> >> "Steve Babcock" <sbabcock@.hillhouse.ca> wrote in message
>> >> news:434E6529.9DBA7366@.hillhouse.ca...
>> >> > Is it possible to have 2 SQL 2000 (STD) servers access a common RAID
>> >> > disk containing the database and work concurrently?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>
No comments:
Post a Comment