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.

 All Forums
 SQL Server 2008 Forums
 High Availability (2008)
 Cluster- Databases per Instance

Author  Topic 

astorrev
Starting Member

1 Post

Posted - 2010-04-06 : 09:18:01
I am looking at implementing a SQL 2008 cluster enviroment within a test lab, for testing prior to live. I have a general question, what is advised as the maximum number of databases you can have per instance on a 64bit system within a cluster.

I know that for a mirror its advised for around 10 on a 32 bit system.

Any advice is appriciated.

Thanks

dinakar
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker

2507 Posts

Posted - 2010-04-06 : 13:48:17
Clustering is different from Mirroring in how it works. There is no per instance limit as such. However there is a limit on the number of nodes the OS can support with clustering. The numbers are different depending on the version of OS. There is a clustering white paper on SQLCAT.com if you want to look up the details.

Dinakar Nethi
************************
Life is short. Enjoy it.
************************
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/dinakar/
Go to Top of Page

tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess

38200 Posts

Posted - 2010-04-06 : 15:22:39
I try to keep the number of databases on each instance low, perhaps less than 30. This is due to the database maintenance jobs. The more databases there are, the longer the job will run since the jobs act on one database at a time. I have both standalone servers and clusters, and regardless of which I use that philosophy.

Tara Kizer
Microsoft MVP for Windows Server System - SQL Server
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/tarad/

Subscribe to my blog
Go to Top of Page

Kristen
Test

22859 Posts

Posted - 2010-04-06 : 15:58:31
Interesting point Tara. I have thought about having my Maint Sproc launch single-shot jobs, concurrently, to prevent then forming a sequential queue - and thus a "every 15 minute" TLog backup not get stuck behind a job that is maybe going to take an hour to run.

But I haven't done anything as yet ...

What do you think?
Go to Top of Page

tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess

38200 Posts

Posted - 2010-04-06 : 16:05:23
It depends on your hardware resources if you can run multiples at a time.

A TLog backup job should run regardless if other jobs are running too.

Tara Kizer
Microsoft MVP for Windows Server System - SQL Server
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/tarad/

Subscribe to my blog
Go to Top of Page

Kristen
Test

22859 Posts

Posted - 2010-04-06 : 17:17:54
"A TLog backup job should run regardless if other jobs are running too"

Yup, its just that my Sproc processes each DB in turn, and if it does a TLog backup that "takes a while" then that holds up the backups on the rest of the DBs.

If, instead, my SProc created a one-shot job for each DB's backup they they could run concurrently - no less resources, but collectively they would finish earlier, I suspect.
Go to Top of Page

tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess

38200 Posts

Posted - 2010-04-06 : 17:23:08
Oh I see what you mean. In that case, I would figure out databases take too long for tlog backups and either increase the tlog backup frequency or move those to their own SQL instance.

Tara Kizer
Microsoft MVP for Windows Server System - SQL Server
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/tarad/

Subscribe to my blog
Go to Top of Page

Kristen
Test

22859 Posts

Posted - 2010-04-07 : 03:52:47
Hadn't though of moving them to their own instances </SlapsForehead!> Thanks Tara.
Go to Top of Page
   

- Advertisement -