SQL Server Performance Forum – Threads Archive
sql 2000 and 2005 clustering
I have a requirment to implement a sql 2005 cluster on the same environment where I am running a sql 2000. I know I can install sql 2005 named instance. Does anyone have experience with running sql 2000 and sql 2005 on the same cluster? thanksIf this is for a production environment, then I wouldn’t choose that way.
It is better to differentiate both the versions for the high availabiliy point of view. What is the usage of SQL 2000 database and SQL 2005 growth? Satya SKJ
Contributing Editor & Forums Moderator
http://www.SQL-Server-Performance.Com
This posting is provided “AS IS†with no rights for the sake of knowledge sharing.
I read somewhere that a each virtual server can have only instance of sql server .. if thats the case then I guess we have an answer. Please read the following: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189134.aspx I would like to know what you think. thanks
quote:Originally posted by shahab03
I read somewhere that a each virtual server can have only instance of sql server .. if thats the case then I guess we have an answer. Please read the following:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189134.aspx
I would like to know what you think. thanks
The key to understanding the issue is in the terms; A Virtual Server is not a cluster. On your cluster you can host multiple virtual sql servers.
As I said to you on another site though, don’t complicate things by trying to host different versions of SQL Server on a cluster. There is no gain to be had.
The gain to be had is if you must have the protection of a cluster but your company can not afford the additional hardware. Also, in our instance, we are running SQL 2000 on a 2003 cluster. They want to migrate to SQL 2005 with a cut over process. Rather than invest in new hardware for no reason, setup SQL 2005 as Active/Active on the same cluster as SQL 2000. Then cut over application access when ready, verify no issues and then remove the SQL 2000 instance.
]]>