SQL Server Performance Forum – Threads Archive

ActiveActive Shared Database

Hi
If i need to set up an ActiveActive with both the servers share the same data
(Just like Oracle’s RAC), is Federating the database is the only option. Or this cannot
be done on Microsoft SQLServer 2000 at all? Just to make myself clear..
I have installed cluster services in such a way that virtual server V1 has server1 as active and server2 as passive. Virtual Server V2 has server2 has active and server1 as passive.
On both V1 and V2, i have a database called custdb which resides on its own shared disk arrays. I will partition the data horizontally based on certain criteria and split it across custdb database on both servers. I will have distributed partitioned views that will have a union of both the tables in custdb databases. When application accesses view on any server, depending on where the data resides, the user will be routed. This is just a high level guess, any thoughts on this? Marx.

Check: http://www.sql-server-performance.com/wndows2000_clustering_install_step1.asp HTH Luis Martin
Moderator
SQL-Server-Performance.com

thank you martin. Still i am skeptical about two sqlserver instances sharing the same database. I have only
one application and i dont want another server sitting idle for a failover. Is there anyway
to make use of both the servers resources sharing the same data? For example, Oracle’s Real
Application Clusters which provides High availability and Scalability (scalling out). thanks
Marx.

Have a look at SQL Clustering and refer to books online for Federated database servers, Clustering topics. FOr SQl cluster refer to this linkhttp://www.sql-server-performance.com/clustering_resources.asp HTH Satya SKJ
Moderator
http://www.SQL-Server-Performance.Com/forum
This posting is provided â€œAS ISâ€ with no rights for the sake of knowledge sharing.

thanks satya. I will do my research <img src=’/community/emoticons/emotion-1.gif’ alt=’

‘ /><br /><br />Marx.

You don’t want to have two sql server instances accessing the same database, if fact, I am not sure even if you can do this. If you try, you will most likely end up with corrupt data. I have not tried to do this with a federated setup, so I don’t know how successful it might be. My question for you is why do you want to do this, and do you have other options? —————————–
Brad M. McGehee, MVP
Webmaster
SQL-Server-Performance.Com

Brad – The reason i want to do this is two fold.
– Customer doesnot want another capable server doing nothing waiting for a failover.
– Customer is doing a hand-in-hand comparison with Oracle’s Real Application Cluster which does this. I have done federation couple of years ago by splitting the database across three sqlservers
and creating distributed partitioned views on all the servers. But havent tried it on a cluster
environment. When i say shared data, i meant logically. Physically we will have two databases sitting in
two different servers.(Node1, Node2). Using federation i will have views on both the servers. Depending upon where the actual data is, users will be routed to that node. THis is just an idea. Not sure practically possible or not. Marx

The standard SQL Server cluster is a failover cluster and not a load balancing cluster so you need to do it with federated servers (be it servers in a failover cluster or not).

]]>