General discussion

  • Creator
  • #2316411

    W2K Cluster – Various Issues


    by tomhass ·

    Want to run an Active/Active W2KAS cluster (SQL Active/Passive (Preferred Node=1), COM+ Active/Passive (Preferred Node=2).

    1. For SQL cluster:-
    a. It has been suggested in some forums that a separate SQL instance on 2nd node is required if Active/Active – (even if SQL itself not Active/Active?!) …is this necessary/pre-requistite ?
    b. Do you need a separate db and/or disk resource for 2nd node instance ? (if yes then how do you synchronise ?)

    2. For COM+/SQL:-
    a. I have seen some (vague) references to needing separate disk physical resource for differing apps (e.g. 1 x RAID-1 pair on shared for SQL (or 2 x RAID-1 pair if ans to 1a is yes) and 1 x RAID-1 pair for COM+ – can anyone elaborate/confim/deny ?
    b. I have seen article about COM+ Clustering but it seemed to indicate use of Network Load Balancing rather than clustering – can you use either for COM+ ?
    c. Following on from the above, we may want to use simple Active/Passive for SQL and NLB for COM+ – is it acceptable to mix and match these technologies on the same servers ?
    d. Have I got the above wrong – just seen another term ‘CLB’ Component Load Balancing ?!

    3. Deployment
    a. Have used PQ Deploy Center in the past (and Ghost a little bit) to deploy mainly PCs – although have used for servers – what is best way/best practice to deploy several clusters (each on different domain) ? Options as I see them:-
    i) Just image of plain OS and manually do rest
    ii) Image of servers after cluster service installed/configured (not sure of issue this will present upon restore of image)
    iii) Image of servers after cluster service AND applications installed/configured
    ….more options ?

    4. Quorum disk
    Articles say not to let Quorum physical disk be used for anything else but as Quorum is only 500Mb and minimum disk is 18 or even 36Gb disk….what a waste! – can you reasonably use remainder of disk for anything at all ?



All Comments

  • Author
    • #3378743

      Reply To: W2K Cluster – Various Issues

      by joncr ·

      In reply to W2K Cluster – Various Issues

      I’ll try to answer what I know about.

      3) Dont try to create one image for all the nodes in a cluster. SQL uses the SID and has sync problems and you can loose data. Best way I have found is to just image the OS and ghostwalk (sid changing app) before joining the SQL cluster.

      A great way to recover a node from a corrupt OS is to have a .gho file of the system partition on a separate partition on the same array. This way you can restore the OS completely and its really fast as you are restoring to the same array. We restore 6 Gig partitions in about 10 minutes. The only problem we have is the occasional DC which you need to drop it out of the domain and rejoin.

      4) One disk? your Quorum should be mirrored at least. If that disk dies you loose your cluster. I have no problem with a Raid 5 array of 5 x 72 GB disk and reserving 500mb for a Quorum partition. I think the articles may mean don’t have anything other than the Quorum on the Quorum PARTITION.

      Hope this goes part of the way to solving your questions.

    • #3378590

      Reply To: W2K Cluster – Various Issues

      by tomhass ·

      In reply to W2K Cluster – Various Issues

      Answer 1

      3. Okay – thanks iconr. Looks as though a LOT of work on the cluster will have to be manual if you can only image OS before cluster install 🙁

      4. Quorum disk – articles definitely say physical…apparently if you have a really busy array Quorum writes may fail and become corrupted. Prefer your approach if it is safe though !

      Hopefully someone out there will be able to clarify and comment on Questions 1 and 2……

    • #2744596

      Reply To: W2K Cluster – Various Issues

      by tomhass ·

      In reply to W2K Cluster – Various Issues

      Okay some more points on offer…if no takers by 22Sep03 then the only and only response so far grabs all points !

    • #2742073

      Reply To: W2K Cluster – Various Issues

      by tomhass ·

      In reply to W2K Cluster – Various Issues

      This question was closed by the author

Viewing 3 reply threads