Multiple IP's (from 2 Different Networks) On A Single SQL 2005 Cluster
Dec 6, 2007
Hello there,
I'm currently building up a SQL 2005 Active/Standby cluster in a DMZ. I have three NIC's in each server.
Each NIC is connected to a different network:
192.168.100.1 is the public NIC
10.0.0.1 is the NIC used for communication betwen the cluster nodes (heartbeat)
192.168.200.1 is the admin NIC
I have installed my cluster using the 192.168.100.0 network for public access. This means that my SQL virtual ip is 192.168.100.10
Each server can be administered over the 192.168.200.0 network (admin) and the cluster/sql sever ip is available from the 192.168.100.0 (public) network.
Now for my question: How can I assign a ip address from my admin network (e.g.192.168.200.10) to the existing SQL server cluster to make it available from my admin network while keeping the public ip.
Thanx in advance!
I am having trouble setting up my Pull Subscription and I am new to replication.
I have several servers hosting a databased website that will be the same, except for user input and traffic. Quite simply, I need to copy most tables, SPs and data from network to network. I can't use FTP/Web synch ... as I mentioned the networks do not touch eachother or the internet.
On server Web1, it was easy to create a Publication called Pub via the wizard for my database: TheDB. Then on Web1, again, I added a Subscription to the Publication, indicating my second server, Web2, and the same database name: TheDB (I have already backed up and restored TheDB to all my servers). Here's one of the sp's I ran on Web1:
I copied the snapshot folder, ie. 20070709134423, onto CD and moved it into Web2's default replication folder, but I always receive: cannot connect to Distibutor. I've tried using an Alias, as well, but don't understand exactly how I should point that either. I checked the publication's PAL and my Web2 user has rights and is an owner of the Web2 TheDB database.
Hi all, I have a production website at Godaddy and an ASP.net 2.0 page that successfull connects to a SQL 2005 instance provided by Godaddy using SQL authentication(User ID/Password). The Godaddy database has become too small (200MB limit) and the plan is to use the SQL Server 2005 standard edition at my office. In other words, I want to host my own SQL server and keep the front-end at Godaddy. The ASP.net test page at Godaddy generates the basic connection errors when attempting to connect to my SQL server at the office. This error has several variations depending on how the connection string is configured: An error has occurred while establishing a connection to the server. When connecting to SQL Server 2005, this failure may be caused by the fact that under the default settings SQL Server does not allow remote connections. (provider: TCP Provider, error: 0 - A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond.) In this case the connection string is: Data Source=xxx.xxx.xx.xxx,1433; Network Library=DBMSSOCN; Initial Catalog=Test; User ID=xxx; Password=xxx" I've embedded this connection string directly into the ASP.net test page in order to make this page independent of the web.config file. My MS SQL server is on a Small Bussiness Server 2003 with Sharepoint and Remote Workplace running, and this machine is behind a linksys router, and Routing and Remote Access is running in place of windows firewall. I've openned ports TCP 1433 and UDP 1434 on the router and Routing and Remote Access. Telnet xxx.xxx.xxx.xxxx 1433 connects successfull, and the SQL log shows listening on 1433. I don't know if telnet is telling me that there is successful connection to the port on the router, or if it makes it all the way to the SQL server. The SQL server is running the default instance MSSQLSERVER. Locally, I am able to connect using SQL 2005 Studio, and I am able to confirm this activity in the SQL log. Since I've openned port 1433, I also see numerous dictionary attacks in the SQL Log. Based on this, remote connectivity is there. The strange observation is that the SQL log shows no sign of a connection attempt from the ASP.net page. The connection appears to be failing before it reaches the SQL server. I've openned ports in the Linksys router and the NAT/Firewall the same way I've openned them for Sharepoint and Remote Workplace. I also found that when I move the ASP.net test page to another ISP, then the SQL connection that worked from the Godaddy website, is no longer able to connect. An explanation of this would also be very helpful to me. Is there something that needs to be configured to expose the SQL server to ASP.net pages that is different from remote access? Does IIS need to somehow be involved? Is there something in Small Business Server 2003 that could be interferring with ASP.net page requests to the SQL server? Do I need to run my machine as a web server to make this work? Any help with this configuration would be greatly appreciated.
Is it possible to setup an cluster with sql server 2005 as single node cluster - and lets say in 4 month we add the second node to the cluster? - its because of budget and we do not want to setup then again.
I am in the process of moving databases from a SQL 2005 Standard version to a 2-node 2014 cluster.All of my 2005 databases back up successfully.They all restore without issue except for one database that has a full text catalog. I get this message
Msg 7610, Level 16, State 1, Line 2 Access is denied to "fileStoragedataMSSQLSERVERFullTextCatalog", or the path is invalid. Msg 3156, Level 16, State 50, Line 2 File 'sysft_FTCatalog' cannot be restored to 'fileStoragedataMSSQLSERVERFullTextCatalog'. Use WITH MOVE to identify a valid location for the file. Msg 3119, Level 16, State 1, Line 2 Problems were identified while planning for the RESTORE statement. Previous messages provide details. Msg 3013, Level 16, State 1, Line 2 RESTORE DATABASE is terminating abnormally.
[code]....
I went as far as giving the folder full access to everyone temporarily and received the same error.
I have created a single FULLTEXT on col2 & col3. suppose i want to search col2='engine' and col3='toyota' i write query as
SELECT
TBL.col2,TBL.col3 FROM
TBL INNER JOIN
CONTAINSTABLE(TBL,col2,'engine') TBL1 ON
TBL.col1=TBL1.[key] INNER JOIN
CONTAINSTABLE(TBL,col3,'toyota') TBL2 ON
TBL.col1=TBL2.[key]
Every thing works well if database is small. But now i have 20 million records in my database. Taking an exmaple there are 5million record with col2='engine' and only 1 record with col3='toyota', it take substantial time to find 1 record.
I was thinking this i can address this issue if i merge both columns in a Single column, but i cannot figure out what format i save it in single column that i can use query to extract correct information. for e.g.; i was thinking to concatinate both fields like col4= ABengineBA + ABBToyotaBBA and in search i use SELECT
TBL.col4 FROM
TBL INNER JOIN
CONTAINSTABLE(TBL,col4,' "ABengineBA" AND "ABBToyotaBBA"') TBL1 ON
TBL.col1=TBL1.[key] Result = 1 row
But it don't work in following scenario col4= ABengineBA + ABBCorola ToyotaBBA
SELECT
TBL.col4 FROM
TBL INNER JOIN
CONTAINSTABLE(TBL,col4,' "ABengineBA" AND "ABB*ToyotaBBA"') TBL1 ON
TBL.col1=TBL1.[key]
Result=0 Row Any idea how i can write second query to get result?
We are trying to setup a system to system failover cluster using twonodes (x346) which each have a single hba running to seperatecontrollers on the DS400.For full redundnancy, IBM recommends dual path from each node but wedont need that. The current setup has two completly seperate paths. hbaon node 1 to controller A on DS400 and hba on node 2 to controller B.If i take a controller offline, failover works fine to jumo to othercontroller and throw all resources to it's node but if i shutdown anode- the cluster loses all attached storage and DS400 is unaware toswitch ownership to other controller.Is there a way to us mscs without dual path from each node?anotherwords... if either node or controller fails on a single path, wewant the other path to become active.our main goal is to use sql server 2005 clustering on the cluster.everything checks out perfect if i only use one controller on the DS400for both nodes but this brings us back to another single point offailure.I saw that Qlogic has MPIO drivers on thir website for the DS400 but itseems as though they are for 32bit systems and the install errors outwith:C:Driversmpio1.0.8.4 (w32)>install.exe -iPre-Installing the Multi-Path Adapter Filter...SuccessInstalling the Multi-Path Bus Driver...Failure. Error code (0xe0000235)configuration:2 X IBM x346 w/ single QLogic 2340 HBAs running win2k3 64bit EnterpriseDS400 w/ dual controllers
We are planning to upgrade the SQL Server in our production environment from SQL Server 2000 to SQL Server 2005. This is a 4 Node cluster environment with 3 Databases on 3 Virtual instances. The main requirement is to achieve this with no/minimal downtime.
Could you please suggest or direct me to any documentation for the best practices used to upgrade such an environment?
I have a need to add a second Sql instance to an existing cluster. However I read in this article http://www.sql-server-performance.com/articles/clustering/clustering_best_practices_p1.aspx
that this is not recommended. Does anyone know why this is or what problems I may encounter?
Its is running Sql 2005 on a 64 bit windows Server 2003.
If i have a 2 node cluster running a single instance (default) and i want to add another instance to the cluster , can i install the second instance as a defualt instance ?
Since the cluster instances are referred to their virtual names/ip's and if i choose to intall the binaries of the second instance to a different location is this possible?
Since in theory you never have 2 default instances running on a single server but each within a virtual server?
Normally i install a named instance but do i have to ?
I have a need to add a second Sql instance to an existing cluster. However I read in this article http://www.sql-server-performance.com/articles/clustering/clustering_best_practices_p1.aspx
that this is not recommended. Does anyone know why this is or what problems I may encounter?
Its is running Sql 2005 on a 64 bit windows Server 2003.
Hi! I have a general SQL CE v3.5 design question related to table/file layout. I have an system that has multiple tables that fall into categories of data access. The 3 categories of data access are:
1 is for configuration-related data. There is one application that will read/write to the data, and a second application that will read the data on startup.
1 is for high-performance temporal storage of data. The data objects are all the same type, but they are our own custom object and not just simple types.
1 is for logging where the data will be permanent - unless the configured size/recycling settings cause a resize or cleanup. There will be one application writing alot [potentially] of data depending on log settings, and another application searching/reading sections of data. When working with data and designing the layout, I like to approach things from a data-centric mindset, because this seems to result in a better performing system. That said, I am thinking about using 3 individual SDF files for the above data access scenarios - as opposed to a single SDF with multiple tables. I'm thinking this would provide better performance in SQL CE because the query engine will not have alot of different types of queries going against the same database file. For instance, the temporal storage is basically reading/writing/deleting various amounts of data. And, this is different from the logging, where the log can grow pretty large - definitely bigger than the default 128 MB. So, it seems logical to manage them separately.
I would greatly appreciate any suggestions from the SQL CE experts with regard to my approach. If there are any tips/tricks with respect to different data access scenarios - taking into account performance, type of data access, etc. - I would love to take a look at that.
We're upgrading a SQL Server 2000 cluster (Active/Passive) running on Windows 2000 Server to a SQL Server 2005 Cluster running on Windows Server 2003. We can't purchase new hardware and we have no spare hardware. We also need to move from Windows 2000 Server to Windows 2003 Server at the same time. We want to keep downtime to a bare minimum.
What we were thinking was the following steps... Anyone try this?
1. Break the link between the servers.
2. Install a fresh copy of windows 2003 server on one side along with SQL Server 2005. While this step is running, the active node would still be live on Windows 2000 Server and SQL Server 2000 serving our customers.
3. Restore a copy of a backup from the active production side to the node we're upgrading and at that point we would bring the active node down, switching the active node to be the newly upgraded server.
4. As a final step, the old active node would now have the link to it broken, we would install a fresh copy of windows 2003 server on it and sql server 2005. At this point we would bring it back into the cluster and the cluster would be complete again.
Need your help and guidence for doing upgrading SQL Server 2000 Cluster to SQL Server 2005 Cluster.
Let me explain my current environment.
1. Currently SQL Server 2000 Cluster environment is running on Windows 2000 Server we need to upgrade this to SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2003 Server. >>> Production environment.
My Plans:
1. On Testing Environment Install SQL Server 2000 cluster on Windows 2003 Server and do a restore of databases from the produciton environment.
2. Upgrade In-Place from SQL Server 2000 Cluster to SQL Server 2005 Cluster.
My doubts
1. Can i install SQL Server 2000 Cluster on Windows 2003 Server. Is it possible or not.
We have a SQL 2014 AlwaysOn availability group running on two Windows 2012 R2 servers that are in the same subnet. We created a new server in a second subnet, installed SQL, joined the server to the Windows cluster, added a new IP resource for the new cluster, and performed the other remaining steps to add a new AG replica to the SQL instance on this new server. When we try to move the core cluster resources to the new node to test failover, we get an error. Here's the command we've been using:
Move-ClusterGroup "Cluster Group" -Node node3
and it returns the error: The operation failed because either the specified cluster node is not the owner of the group, or the node is not a possible owner of the group...I've checked the ownership of the cluster groups and the cluster resources and it looks like they are set appropriately:
>Get-ClusterGroup | Get-ClusterOwnerNode Cluster Object Owner Nodes ---------------- --------------- Available Storage {} Cluster Group {node1,node2,node3} SQLAG {node1,node2,node3}
[code]....
We've double-checked that all IP resources are in the right subnets and that the dependencies for the Cluster Name resource and the Listener Name resource are set appropriately. I'm not sure what else to check since the PowerShell commands seem to indicate that node3 is an owner of the appropriate resources. What other things need to be checked or if the ownership being checked isn't the same as what PowerShell is checking?
greetings,i was wondering is it better to have multiple small stored procedures or one large store procedure ???? example : 100 parameters that needs to be inserted or delete ..into/from a table.............is it better to break it up into multiple small store proc or have 1 large store proc....thanks...............
I'm doing a BCP of a large table 37 million rows. On a single CPU server, SQL 7, sp 3, with 512 meg of RAM, this job runs in about 3 hours. On a 8 way server with 4 Gig of RAM, SQL 7 Enterprise, this job runs 12 hours and is only a third done. The single CPU machine is running one RAID 5 set while the 8 way server is running 4 RAID 5 sets with the database spread out over two of them.
Is there something obvious that a single CPU box would run this much faster?
We have 5 instances on our clients old machine with SQL 2005, now they want us to move on cluster environment with SQL 2012.
Once I have installed and configured SQL cluster with single instance, but how to install SQL Cluster environment for Multiple instances.
Should I install all the instances first and than have to configure cluster ? OR Is there any way that first I will install cluster and than we can add the instances ?
What I have- Sql server 2012 (Standard Ed) Cluster on Windows 2012 R2 with both instances running on the same node- just to save on License, i.e. technically it’s Act/Pas cluster.
What I am looking for- how to configure cluster (e.g. via quorum, etc) to force both instances failed together? Means if for some reason 1-st instance will fail to node 2 another instance should follow (otherwise it will be Act/Act cluster and 2-nd license is required).
If there is no standard way (cluster configuration I mean) to do it I should create some custom process to monitor where each instance is running.
My environment has a 4 node cluster , 2 in primary and 2 in sec dc. Storage is sperate for both.
Need to setup always on for 4 Instances there on the 2 nodes of the primary dc. Is there any restriction in setting up always on for multiple instances for a cluster.
Is it possible to have more than one instance of SQL Server on a failover Active/Passive cluster? What are the concerns/ramifications if that indeed is possible?
I am wondering the best way to go about a task I have been assigned. We have two similar websites but each is located on a different network. One network is secure so it cannot be accessed on the normal WWW. The secure network will contain the master database. I need to write a program or do something with SQL server to retrieve all records from the WWW site and get them onto the secure database. I also in the future will need to update records from the WWW site if they have been updated. What is the easiest way to move data from one network to the other when I cannot connect to both databases simultaneously? Thanks, Matt
How can I copy a database from one server to another when they are not on the same network! I have tried to copy across the backup file from one and attempted a restore but i keep getting an error message (Abnormal execution). Is there a way to do this! HELP!
Does anyone know if SQL7 will work with Storage Area Networks(SAN's)? I've read that SQL2000 implements something called a Virtual Interface System Area Network (VI SAN) that allows communication with devices connected via a SAN.
My site is installing a SAN and I need to know if SQL7 can utilize those resources (Storage,etc) and how reliable if so. Randy
I created a test table (name - "Nset") with the columns: id (int), n1 (float), n2 (float), n3 (float) and c1 (varchar). Then filled a table the followings information: id n1 n2 n3 c1
1 0,1 0,1 0,6 one
2 0,2 0,1 0,5 one
3 0,7 0,5 0,1 two
4 0,4 0,9 0,3 two
5 0,5 0,1 0,5 three
And created a neural network with tuning by default. "id"-field is the key. n1, n2 and n3 are inputs. c1 - predict.
Then i tryed predict query, like:
SELECT
PREDICT([Nset].[c1])
FROM
[Nset]
NATURAL PREDICTION JOIN
(SELECT 0,5 AS [n1], 0,1 AS [n2], 0,5 AS [n3]) AS t
The result is "three". This is correct. And some other tests appeared correct.
But, when I filled the column c1 with numerical values (one = 1, two=2, three=3) and changed type to int, a predict query left off to work correctly.
Previous query return 4.
And other tests showed that a value returned large on unit.
hi iam totally new to databases , as a project i have to design a database of users...they have to register first like any site..so i used stored procs and made entries to database using insert command...its working for now..now every user will search and add other users in the database..so every user will have a contact list...i have no idea how to implement this...so far i created a table 'UserAccount' with column names as UserName as varchar(50)Password as varchar(50)EmailID as varchar(100)DateOfJoining as datetimeUserID as int ---> this is unique for user..i enabled automatic increment..and this is primary key..so now every user must have a list of other userid's.. as contact list..Any help any ideas will be great since i have no clue how to put multiple values for each row..i didnt even know how to search for this problems solution..iam sorry if this posted somewhere else..THANK YOU !if it helps..iam using sql server express edition..and iam accessing using asp.net/C#
