• subscribe
January 18, 2005 12:00 AM

Active/Passive vs. Active/Active Clustering

SQL Server Pro
InstantDoc ID #44938

I've implemented an Active/Passive failover cluster for SQL Server 2000. How is Active/Active mode different from Active/Passive mode? And is it possible to perform Active/Active clustering for this version of the database system?

Yes, you can do Active/Active clustering with SQL Server 2000. In SQL Server failover clustering, the OS and SQL Server work together to provide availability in case of an application failure, hardware failure, or OS error. Failover clustering provides hardware redundancy through a configuration in which vital, shared resources are automatically transferred from a failing computer to an equally configured server. Failover clustering is available only with the Enterprise Edition of SQL Server 2000. (For more information about SQL Server failover clustering, see SQL Server Books Online (BOL) and the following October 2003 articles: Michael Hotek's "High Availability Solutions," InstantDoc ID 39986, and Brian Knight's "Clustering SQL Server," InstantDoc ID 40034.)

In SQL Server, Active/Active clustering simply means having two separate instances running in the cluster—one (or more) per machine. So, Active/Active clustering refers to a two-node cluster, with each node running SQL Server instances but each with a different set of databases. This setup is conceptually the same as having two Active/Passive nodes, except that one node must be a named instance.

Note that only one server at a time can open a SQL Server database. If you want to implement a system in which you can update data in two places at once, you need to read about SQL Server's various data-replication options in BOL or by searching on the keyword replication on the SQL Server Magazine home page (http://www.sqlmag.com).



ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • Desperado
    4 years ago
    Dec 05, 2008

    I just wish the would be some clarification on licensing if we decide to run 2 instances on just one node for more than 80% of the time.

  • sekhar9
    5 years ago
    Apr 17, 2007

    i have an oltp system in which if i configured the sql server in active/active then how the data will be in sync

  • LAURA
    5 years ago
    Mar 02, 2007

    I am often asked "Why would you select Active/Active over Active/Passive?".

    My typical reply is that you can save on hardware resources - provided that each of the servers in the cluster can handle the potential workload in the event of a failure.

    Since an Active/Passive configuration essentially results in a machine sitting idle waiting for a failure to occur, some DBAs would prefer to put that idle machine to use in an Active/Active configuration.
    The important thing to note here is that if a failover event occurs, the remaining server will need to service the requests of both SQL Server instances simultaneously - so properly sizing them in the beginning is necessary.

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here
  • SP1?
    I know there is a SP1 for SQL 2008 R2 available....and there is a "feature pack" as well... ...
  • SQL database mirroring
    I have SQL Server 2008 R2 Enterprise 64bit on Windows 2008 R2 Enterprise 64bit.  Each SQL Server has...
  • Dell Compellent Disk Drive
    Does anybody has experience with Dell Compellent Disk Drive? Basically, this system manages all disk...
  • Sql server performance tuning
    I need to find a tool that help me to optimize sql server,queries,improve the performance and solve ...