Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
ehfrancisco
Starting Member
2 Posts |
 Posted - 2010-10-04 : 12:18:03
|
| I have a question regarding SQL 2008 R2 on a Hyper-V Cluster.If I have SQL 2008 R2 setup on a Hyper-V Cluster only (no SQL Cluster), what happend if only the SQL server engine fails? Will the Hyper-V Cluster failover to the stanby server?Thanks,Ed |
|
|
Bruce Sherwood
Starting Member
12 Posts |
Posted - 2010-10-04 : 15:40:05
|
I gave up on Hyper-V a while ago, so this may be worth little....In theory unless you set a dependency within Hyper-V, the failure of a single service (SQL Server engine) in a single virtual machine will not trigger a failover. That is why you implement SQL Server as a cluster itself, and then its failure will force a move to the alternate node.SQL Server 2008 Standard Edition supports a 2 node cluster with out any additional licensing required. So its worth the effort if you can already build clustered machines in Windows.quote:
Originally posted by ehfrancisco
I have a question regarding SQL 2008 R2 on a Hyper-V Cluster.If I have SQL 2008 R2 setup on a Hyper-V Cluster only (no SQL Cluster), what happend if only the SQL server engine fails? Will the Hyper-V Cluster failover to the stanby server?Thanks,Ed
-----Ummm.. Yeah.. About that... |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hyper-V Cluster Question