We have a multi-lingual website (English, Spanish and German). We have a table called Posts that is potentially getting really big.
We are in the initial design phase of the database and would like to know what the experts are suggesting to keep our database mean and lean in the long run.
We have been talking about splitting the database up into 3 separate databases, one for English, one for Spanish and one for German. The language specific databases would also be hosted in countries where the language is spoken eg. the German database would be hosted in Germany.
Or maybe database partitioning by language???
Making changes to 3 databases once launched seems like a nightmare. It would be nice to have one main database and maybe 2 (Spanish and German) €œsatellite€? databases or something like that €“ any ideas???.
Any suggestions of how to deal with this problem the best way would be greatly appreciated. We are using SQL Server 2005.
We are beginning to design a new application with SQL Server 2005. Our current production environment is slated to be two SQL Server 2005 machines with the databases residing on an EMC SAN. We have requirements to both have automatic failover between servers for availability and also be able to balance the load over two hot servers for scalability.
Can anyone point me in the right direction for things I need to consider in order to be able to implement both of these requirements? Can I implement database mirroring (for failover) and transactional replication (for balancing) given the hardware configuration I'v mentioned? Is more information needed? Where should I turn next?
I am coming off a mainly Oracle background for the last ten or so years with a smattering of SQL Server mixed in. I've tried to hit the ground running on this project, but sometimes find myself hitting the wall running instead.
Is there a way to configure mirroring to go from High Availability to High Protection without having to reconfigure Database Mirroring? Using the interface in Management Studio, I can change the configuration option to High Performance, but not High Protection despite both of them being Synchronous.
If not, what are the recommended steps to configure the mirror once it already has been configured? Is just like initially setting up the mirror or would there be any shortcuts I could take? If I stop the mirroring and remove the witness, will the High Protection option be available?
Hello everybody, We are starting new project Customer validation with minimum wait time. How to insure High-Availability? We have 2 standard servers and in past used custom log shipping.
Log shipping still requre manual intervention ,while goal to switch between servers automaticly.
Clustering is a last possible solution.
Could someone recomend any other soluion or products?
Hi, I am new in SQL SERVER.I wanted to setup high availability database.It would be great if any one could answers my questions please. -What are the options availability for HA except clustering? -How to set up log shipping HA ? -How to monitor log shipping? -Is standby DB and log shipping same ? -Can I setup log shipping without backup/restore method.Like I have to create db1 on server A and create db1 on server B and then configure log shipping? -Is it necessary to ship log for master database or only user Database? Thx -Blace
I have to describe Microsoft SQL High Availability options in the following layers: infrastructure, middleware and application. I know there are following options available: failover clustering, replication, mirroring and AlwaysOn but I am not sure in which layer each of them are.
I have implemented log shipping between 2 databases, the transaction log size normally between 10mb - 50mb every 15 minutes during normal working hours, but it grows to 9GB when we run database optimization job and that makes it hard and long to transfer and apply the transaction log on the other database. Does anybody encountered a situation like this and is there a way to minimize the size of the Trans log after the optimization job?
Hello, Does any one know, any software out there that can provide a solid failover / cluster / high availability solution for SQL Server 2000 Databases. I have tried Incepto but it requires an extra column in every single table that involves in Replication and its not gonna work
I've been asked to look into the possibility of using SQL Server in a high availability environment. We have a few web based applications that use SQL Server back end DBs. What we are looking into is whether we can use multiple instances (on multiple physical servers) of SQL Server using some type of clustering/load balancing. I haven't worked with SQL Replication before, so I'm not even sure where to start in exploring the possible avenues we can explore.
Can anyone push me in the right direction? Any info would be greatly appreciated!
The company that I work for has multiple database instances across two data centres in two different cities. All of these databases have front end applications reading/writing data to them.
Now, we have taken an initiative to merge all databases into one consolidated database. Then we want this database to be available in the other data centre. We'll have front application running at both locations reading/writing data to the databases and want it to be written to the other database too. These systems are in production 24/7 and we cannot afford any downtime over 5 minutes.
Replication, Log shipping, Mirroring or combination?
Here is the situation we are trying to resolve. The client has 2 locations, each has local appliations running on a database. db schema on both locations are the same, data is different and won't overlap.
The requirements are: 1. at each location the application can read and write 2. near zero down time for applications on each site 3. db on one site also has the data from the other site for DR purpose
The client is running on SQL 2005 STD SP2
We looked at the approach of setting up db mirroring on each location + 2-way transactional replication between both locations. The mirroring was fine, and I was able to set up transactional replication from mirrored publisher to a non-mirrored subscriber. But, from what I experienced and from reading, there is no way to have the subscriber db to be mirrored, since Distribution Agents simply doesn't have the option to specify Failover Partnr for mirroring, so I guess it is not supported. Any comments on that?
Assuming that's correct, then the only way of using SQL out-of-box technique seems to be using Clustering on each location instead of mirroring, then the 2-way transactional replication works on clustered subscribers I think (although I haven't tested it). Peer-2-Peer replication would have been a good candidate between sites in this case, but STD version of sql 2005 ruled that out.
I would like implementing a database mirroring architecture with SQL server 2005 but i have questions.
If i don't use a cluster architecture, i would like knowing if there's any solution to move the alias SQL server from the primary to the secondary by script.
I am using SQL Server 2012 and my AlwaysOn High Availability features is not enabled? What should I do. Is this requires any extra system requirements to be installed?
I have a Customer running a database in a High Availability Group and I am not familiar with the set up... They have a transaction log that quadrupled in size during a data import and update which was generated by an external application. They have limited server space and would like to shrink the log again now as this import / update only happens once a year. The way this has always been dealt with in the past was by shrinking the DB and logs after the update.
Now however, when attempting to do a log or db shrink, an error message is generated which says that the log cannot be shrunk as the DB is in use as part of an Availability Group....
The more I search and try to read up on this subject, it looks like the DB has to be removed from the Availability Group before the log can be shrunk and then the Availability Group has to be re-created or restored in some way. Is there a simple solution to this conundrum?
I inherited a SQL 2012 Ent server sitting on a 2008R2 server using AlwaysOn High Availability, two nodes.
Available Mode: Synchronous commit Failover Mode: Manual Connection in Primary role: Allow all connections Readable secondary: No seesion timeout: 10
Somebody decided to give SQL server priority boost so I need to change this ASAP. So I plan on doing the following.
1. Manually fail over to the secondary, which does not have the priority boost set to true 2. change the setting 3. restart the service 4. Manually fail over
My question is with the service restart. How does SQL handle if the DB changes on the new primary while the secondary is having the service restarted. Where can I see if the DB are sync again or if not where are they in the sync process.
I am trying to create a job that runs against my High Availability listener server.
It is a fairly simple SQL statement in the job - execute tsql.
When I try and run the job I get the error:
Executed as user: NT SERVICESQLAgent$SQL2014A. The target database ('BB_Prod') is in an availability group and is currently accessible for connections when the application intent is set to read only. For more information about application intent, see SQL Server Books Online. [SQLSTATE 42000] (Error 978). The step failed.
I thought there was a way to run a select statement as a job against the listener? The tsql step is only a select.
Is there a way to pass in the application intent = readonly as part of my SQL statement?
Discovered that a geo-spatial AlwaysOn HA database (1 of 4) was not synchronizing as at a point in time earlier in the day. Â Suspend Data Movement appears to be working perpetually without finishing. Â The SQL Server services is in a Pending Changes state after an attempt to restart it from SQL Configuration Manager. Â The Cluster Dashboard says it is in a Not Synchronizing state, with only the one database in question having a yellow triangle, all 3 others show green. Â
The warning for the cluster is:At least one availability database on this availability replica has an unhealthy data synchronization state. If this is an asynchronous-commit availability replica, all availability databases should be in the SYNCHRONIZING state. If this is a synchronous-commit availability replica, all availability databases should be in the SYNCHRONIZED state. Â There is no abnormal data movement from the primary to the seconday.The warnings for the unhealthy database are:
The data synchronization state of this availability database is unhealthy. On an asynchronous-commit availability replica, every availability database should be in the SYNCHRONIZING state. On a synchronous-commit replica, every availability database should be in the SYNCHRONIZED state.Either a database administrator or the system has suspended data synchronization on this availability database.So how to get this database back to synchronizing state?
Backing up all databases on a sql server that hosts secondary high availability databases as well as other databases. Â The other databases back up fine, but the high availability secondaries all get the same error:
BackupDiskFile::OpenMedia: Backup device 'F:MSSQLBackupdbnamedbname_backup_2015_MM_DD_tttttt_ttttttt.bak' failed to open. Operating system error 2(The system cannot find the file specified.)
I am in the process of designing a database infrasture layout that can virtually scale to an very large number of servers in efforts to improve performance. The Scale-out architecture vs. grid computing (something like Oracle RAC) seems to be the way to go. It may take a lot more work up front, but it seems very flexible in the long run.
One of the issues that I am trying to tackle is how should I grow this thing. Right now, I have one single 4 way server running SQL 2005 Ent. edt. We are planning on getting a second server as well as a Enterprise level San solution.
With my 2 goals in mind (Scale out architecture and High Avail) should I bring this second server online as a passive cluster node, or should I partition out the data across both nodes. Will clustering even be part of my fault tolerence plan or should I use replication?
Its hard to find a good answer as what is the *best* way to make this happen.
I came across an issue while migrating from SQL 2005 to SQL 2012 and using AlwaysOn Group. For some strange reason, when ever i connect to the Listener name for each AlwaysOn group, it list all the databases which is on the SQL instance, so i would be able to see databases that is not part of that Availability Group. I am not using default port, so have to put the port after the Name to connect and both Instance and Listener are using different port. Testing the fail over works fine too, when i perform a manual failover, i can connect to any of the databases in the group from my application with no problem.
Considering that the Listener Port is different to the port which the instance is using?
We have a vendor that is exposing our database via a High Availability replica. They are geographically far away from us though so we would like to extract portions of the database over to our side for our reporting /warehousing purposes. I was curious if it is possible to setup snapshot replication on a high availability group?
I have a HA Listener which is visible and can be connected to, it has a read only secondary on a different subnet so when connecting to it we use the applicationintent = readonly and multisubnetfailover = true.
Trying to connect it as a linked server is giving me problems. I tried putting the extra info into the provider string but keep getting the failure to initialise error. I am trying to link SQL2012 to a 2012 HA group but will also need to connect from a sql2008 server as well
We are looking at going down the High Availability Always On route. However we have some concerns around the lack of support for MSDTC. In short we are concerned that developers may introduce functionality either on purpose or by mistake that uses the or escalates the Query’s to the MSTDTC. As this could result in database splitting.
Understand that this will be a moot point in SQL 2016 but for 20122014 is it possible to disable the MSDTC to protect against this and run High Availability Always On. ? Does it just need to be disabled on the SQL Server or does it need to be done on the application server ?
I have getting issues when i am creating listener for always On . Error shown as below
Can not bring the Windows server fail over cluster (WSFC) resources online. (Error Code 5942). The WSFC service may not be running or may not be accessible in its currents states, or the WSFC resources may not be in a state that could accept the request.
For information about this error code see "system error code" in windows development documentationÂ
The attempt to create network name and IP address for the listener is failed. The WSFC service may not be running or may not be accessible in its currents states or the value provide for the network name and IP address may be incorrect. Check the state of the WSFC cluster and validate network name and IP address with network administrator. (Microsoft SQL Server error 41066) ...
Hi, can I assign a NAS(Network Attached Storage) server to store the database file(readable and writable) and assign other several MS SQL database servers which will use the same database file in NAS to achieve the objective of high availability?
If it can, how can I set it up in MS SQL Server or it requires another 3rd patry software to set it up?
We have a requirement to build SQL environment which will give us local high availability and disaster recovery to second site. We have two sites- Site A & Site B. We are planning to have two nodes at Site A and 2 nodes at Site B. All four nodes will be part of same Windows failover cluster. We will build two SQL Cluster, InstanceA will be clustered between the nodes at Site A Server and InstanceB will be clustered between the nodes at Site B, we will enable Always On Between the InstanceA and InstanceB and will be primary owner where data will be written on InstanceA and will be replicated to InstaceB. URL....Now we want we will have instanceC on the Site B and data will be writen from the application available on Site B, will be replicated to the instance on the Site A as replica.
I realise this is a stupid quesiton but i cannot really find any confirmation of this in BOL.
If you are running High Safety with automatic failover, when failover occurs does this automatically change to High Performance mode. SInce for failover to occur something has happen with the primary , it will be impossible to commit transactions on the new primary and mirror asyncronously since 1 of them is no longer available.
So am i correct in assuming that automatic failover also automatically changes the mode to High Performacne for that session?
Whats the best way to test scalability on a database? I'm working on a new app, and have handed off developing the database to someone with more experience. Some tables will grow to many million records, and I don't want it to bottleneck. I need to have it fully tested before it goes live.
Is it reasonable to ask the person helping me to fill it with 10's of millions of rows to test performance? Is this a decent solution? If so, what would the best way to fill it be? If not, what steps should I take?
