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 |
|
nhuanlieu
Starting Member
27 Posts |
 Posted - 2008-02-07 : 13:23:00
|
to all the HA experts, we were wondering if we could have 3 physical nodes and 2 virtual clusters architecture setup on a SAN? I know about this restriction: Server B cannot be called upon as the active servers at the SAME time by both clusters. Even then, what would happens, would Server B reject the last cluster that calls it? |
|
|
rmiao
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7266 Posts |
Posted - 2008-02-07 : 21:33:25
|
| You can run both instances on server B if it has enough horsepower. |
 |
|
|
nhuanlieu
Starting Member
27 Posts |
Posted - 2008-02-08 : 14:22:21
|
| Thanks, if I run both instances on server B, would I have need to have a 1-cluster-3-nodes setup or a 2-clusters-3-nodes setup? I was told a server cannot actively participate > 1 clusters, so am I would have to use the 1-cluster-3-nodes model? Thanks. |
|
|
|
rmiao
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
7266 Posts |
Posted - 2008-02-08 : 22:15:44
|
| You need a 3-node cluster, and yes a node can't be in more than one cluster. |
|
|
|
eyechart
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
3575 Posts |
Posted - 2008-02-09 : 01:45:31
|
| even if you could have 3 physical servers involved in 2 separate clusters, that would give you less redundancy than a single 3-node cluster.this is becuase if you ever lost that single shared system, both clusters (in your 2 cluster scenario) would be at risk. losing a single node in a 3-node cluster still leaves you with 2 physical servers participating in the cluster.can you explain why the 2 cluster scenario is being looked at? Seems like you have spent some time on this and am curious about why.-ec |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3-nodes and 2-clusters architecture ?