Recovery :: IP Change For Cluster / Nodes And Windows Cluster?
Jul 15, 2015
We are planning to change all IPs of PRODUCTION Failover Cluster Setup. In my cluster setup ... we have 2 Physical Nodes with windows-2008, Roles are MSDTC and SQL-2008R2.
IP change for:
1. Both Nodes(Physical)
2. MSDTC
3. SQL Server
4. windows Cluster
So Almost... All IPs are going to change.
Im DBA here, I need to take care of SQL cluster and MSDTC. But I haven't performed this activity before.So I'm worrying about Impacts and consequences of this change. steps how should I perform this activity.
I'm just starting to work with AlwaysOn Availability and WSFC.
I have in my environment (in Azure) a DC, WSFC and to SQL instances, so I have 3 nodes in my Failover Cluster:
WSFC SQL1 SQL2
If I simulate failure by shutting down one of the SQL boxes my Availability group seamlessly fails over to the other SQL instance - which is great.
However, I'm starting to look into the workings of the Quorum, my envt has the default settings and when I shutdown both of my SQL servers I expected the Cluster itself to go offline as 2 out of the 3 votes will be negative, but the Cluster is still up - Screenshot below when SQL1 and SQL2 are shutdown:
Going through the Wizard (but not changing anything) it shows following config:
I have a Windows 2008 R2 Always on Cluster with 3 nodes (two in the primary site and one in the DR site).
Primary Site: -Primary Site Server1 -Primary Site Server2
DR Site 1 (to be decommed): -DR Site Server1
Our company is planning on decommissioning the DR site. But before we do this, we want to add a 4th site to the cluster. Migrate the data...and then decommission the original DR Site.
Is it possible to have this configuration:
Primary Site: -Primary Site Server1 -Primary Site Server2
DR Site 1 (to be decommed): -DR Site Server1
DR Site 2 (NEW DR Site): -DR Site Server1
IF this is possible, do I simply add the new DR site to the existing cluster (same steps as adding the first DR node to the cluster when the cluster was originally configured? or are there special steps?
We have many tables which have cluster index on column with datatype 'Char(200)'. Does anyone have script to change cluster index to noncluster for all user tables which have clustered index on a column with 'char(200)' datatype.
We had an existing 2 node active / active cluster, 1 running a default instance of Sql Server 2005 Enterprise Edition 9.0.3152 (SP2 + Hotfixes) and the other running a named instance of the same version.
We recently added 2 new nodes to the cluster, they were successfully added and we tested the cluster group failover successfuly to the new nodes.
Last night we tried to install Sql Server 2005 Enterprise edition on the new nodes.
I followed to proper proceudure of modifying the installation for both instances and selecting the 2 new nodes to apply them to. This went 100%. Sql Server 2005 successfully installed for both instances on the 2 new nodes, all log files were successful.
We then tried to apply SP2, we tried the following:
1. We ran SP2 from the active node, but when we go to the screen to select what you want to apply SP2 too we could not select anything, if you clicked on database engine the message said that these instances were already at a later version and we could not proceed. This is how i successfully applied SP2 to the original 2 node cluster but it does not work for additional nodes to an exisitng cluster.
This is also what all the documentation we could find said, refer to SP2 release notes under the topic "Failover Cluster Installation", it is also the method we found when googling.
2. We then tried what is described under SP2 release notes "Rebuild a SQL Server 2005 SP2 Failover Cluster Node". We ran SP2 from the new nodes while they were passive, but when we got the screen where you select what to apply the SP2 too we could not select database engine the message at the bottom said that SP2 must be run from the active node and that we were attempting it from the passive node, this is what we tried in step 1 described above.
3. This was a last resort. We were advised to try failing over the instance to the new node and then running SP2. Personally i thought this was a bad idea, one should never fail over a instance of sql server to a node with incompatible binary versions and secondly when we installed sql server on the new nodes a warnng popped up before hand stating that the instances were at a later version and that the new nodes must be at this version before attempting fail over. I thought that sql would not even start, to my surprie we successfully failed over the sql group to the new node, when we ran SP2 it looked good we could select the database engine on the new node to apply SP2 too, BUT after clicking next after a few seconds the SP2 installation just closed, NO INFORMAITONAL MESSAGES NO ERRORS NO WARNINGS it just closed an never came back.
I had never seen this happen on a cluster before, needless to say this made me very nervous so we failed the sql group back to the original nodes and gave up.
PLEASE can some tell me how to apply SP2 to 2 new nodes in a 4 node cluster all methods descibed in SP2 release notes and other documentation as descibed above in step 1 and 2 do not work !
I'm setting up a cluster to test a new deployments of SQL2K14 on a WSFC cluster (W2K12R2). Starwinds VS. the built in iSCSI service?Will either one allow me to build a cluster consisting of two nodes? Do I need to dedicate a third node to run the iSCSI storage?
I can't seem to install SQL Server 2005 (x64 version) on an x64 Win2k3 two node cluster.
I get all the way through the configuration and setup fails because it cannot start a task on the remote node. The error message indicates to check the task scheduler log file, which I have and I cannot find any 'errors' in the file.
Google/MSDN/Technet turn up nothing on multiple searches. Has anyone else run into this problem?
My installation account is a local admin on both machines, so is the sql cluster account. For the life of me I cannot figure out what's different for an x64 install vs 32bit....
We currently have a 2 node Active/Passive 2 named instance SQL 2000 cluster. We will be chaning the configuration to Active/Active, basically moving 1 instance to the passive node (so we can take advantage of the resources on the passive node).
We would also like to add 3 nodes to the cluster making it a 5 node SQL cluster. What we are thinking of doing is basically making it an Active/Active/Active/Active with the 5th server being passive. The question I have is will I be able to add and install the 3 new nodes without having to redo the SQL cluster? Should I install the two new active nodes with the default SQL instace or do I have to install SQL with named instances? (actually I think the named instances is the way to go but then I wouldn't be posting here if I was sure about the answer).
How many nodes can you have in a cluster with SQL 2012 alwaysOn.
I understand that availability groups are limited to 5 nodes but if you had a 10 node cluster and decided to create multiple availability groups using various nodes within the 10 nodes but never exceeding 5, is that possible?
Or is there a counter or some validation from SQL AlwaysOn that actually hard limits to a grand total of 5 nodes in a cluster?
I had a cluster running on 3 nodes (windows failover cluster) with server 2012 and SQL server 2012 running in the cluster. Well, I thought I'd just go ahead and rename all 3 of the hosts with new hostnames and it apparently broke the cluster pretty bad. Now when I open failover cluster manager I cannot see anything nor can I connect to the cluster object in AD. I re-named all of the hosts back to their original names but that didn't work.
Is it possible to create a cluster configuration, where 2 (or more) SQL Server instances running on different servers will simultaneously serve the same database attached to the same storage? Something like this:
Instance A Instance B Instance C (active) (active) (active) | / | / | / SAN for Database and Quorum
The point would be to improve reliability and performance at the same time. All nodes would share load. If a node fails, the other nodes still work and take over the load.
I know a failover cluster can be done, where 1 instance is active and others are passive (active/passive) which improves reliability, but in this configuration just 1 instance is serving at the same time.
(As far as I understand, the active/active configuration is meant to run different databases on 2 (or more) instances such that the databases on a failing node are taken over by any other instances in the cluster.)
My question is, I'd like my actual cluster to have 4 servers. The virtual server that will be running SQL 2005 will only be installed on 2 of those nodes. Will this work or do I have to split my cluster in to 2 to meet the SQL Server 2005 2 node failover limitation? A basic config for the cluster would be like below....
ClusterSQLNode Active SQL 2005 Server ClusterExchNode Active Exchange Server ClusterAppNode Active Application Server ClusterFailoverNode Failover SQL 2005 Failover Exchange Failover Application
Will SQL 2005 install in a 4 server cluster if I only install it on to two of the nodes? Any potential gotchas?
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 have found no real documentation on this, so any links would be greatly appreciated.
We have an existing 2 node active active cluster.
A default and and named instance SS2005 Enterprise Edition are installed on the cluster.
Recently we acquired new hardware, 2 servers, which we added to the cluster so we now have a 4 node cluster.
The 2 new nodes have OS etc installed.
Now i have installed sql on a new multi node cluster, i have upgraded sql server in an existing cluster BUT i have never installed sql on an existing cluster for new nodes for multiple instances.
Now i presume you simply run the install on one of the new nodes, do this for a default instance, selecting both 2 new nodes to installl on. And do this again for the named instance.
But in the past I have never been promoted for which nodes to install sql on, it simply does all the nodes BUT i do not want this.
And how will the cluster know where the binary files are for each instance on the new nodes?
In a nutshell, how do i install sql server 2005 for 2 new nodes in an existing 4 node cluster for multiple instances ?
"Site A" SQL 7.0 Cluster with Drives on Shared Storage. "Site B" SQL Server Cluster with Drives on Shared Storage Both Configured as Active/Active (8+ databases <100GB total)
How can I get the DB's (all) from Site A and allow a DIFFERNET cluster to control them.
Basically, I want to move all DB's from "Site A" and bring them into "Site B" with all relevant data ..ie master DB etc . I have a time window of 90 Mins and I cannot lose one single piece of data.........( I need to lie down now) Help would be apprecitated)
We have an HA configuration with an Active-Passive Cluster / Shared Disk SAN which is working great. I have been looking for how to replicate the information to our DR site. We have many databases (some are more static vs. other transactional). I had some questions:Would it make sense to configure a snapshot for the static databases? Is that possible from a clustered environment using it as the publisher?Would it make more sense to configure the clustered environment to use transactional replication? Is it possible from a clustered primary?Is log shipping too archaic?
Cluster services gives the high availability needed - that is great.But I have never seen any discussion about what happens when a nodefails - what do you do to get everything back to the active-passivetandem.I imagine there is not much difference in terms of recovery procedurefor either active or passive node. So I'm just going to make up ascenario that we have encountered. The system hard drive (not theshared disk) on primary node fails. Cluster fails over to the passivenode. Following are the problems I have at hand:-After installing windows, I need to install driver and configure thepermission to access the SAN. There is no way I could do it since thesecondary node has exclusive access to the disks.-Imagine I got that working, is there anyway to install SQL so SQLwould know this server used to be the primary node and attach the DBand translog automatically-Finally, there is no proper way to apply SQL 2000 service pack 3a.Originally when the cluster was fully functional, the service pack wasapplied to active node and that automatically upgrades passive node.Now we have a machine without 3a and a machine with 3a alreadyinstalled. See any problem?Consider all of the above as this one big question: What is a properprocedure to restore a cluster when one of the node goes down? Whetherit's the active or passive node.
I have inherited two separate SQL clusters. One cluster instance is called DESQLSC1INST1 and the other is MKSQLSC1INST1.
On MKSQLSC1INST1 I can connect by using MKSQLSC1INST1, MKSQLSC1 and the IP address that the cluster is running on. On DESQLSC1INST1 I can only connect using DESQLSC1INST1.
I have checked configuration manager but it does not show me how this is set up.
I am learning SQL Server failover cluster installation. My question is regarding the options to install failover cluster instances on the Windows Failover Cluster. I have seen ead there are two options to do so.
From the installation center, installation option-> New SQL Server installation option and afterwards add node to SQL Server failover instance.From Installation Center, Advanced option-> Failover cluster preparation and then Failover cluster completion step.What is the difference between these two options and which option to use in which scenario?
We have 2 clusters, 1 running SQL 2008 on Windows 2008 R2 server and 1 running SQL 2000 on Windows 2003 Server. Because of a disaster with the disks, each of the passive nodes had to be rebuilt and Ive been asked to install SQL on the nodes.
Ive not done this before. Does this mean simply adding a new node to the cluster through the wizard? Or do I need to reinstall the entire cluster?
I think SQL 2000 is too risky as its unsupported, so Im going to resist that. But how should I approach the SQL 2008 Instance?
I am trying to cluster two sql node server on hyper-v both virtual and my situation is below :
two hyper-v host connected to vnxe storage two hyper-v are mapped to 3 LUN ( SQL Data , SQL logs , Quorurm) connectivity between hyper-v and storage direct fiber three LUN are mapped to the virtual SQL01 and SQL02 as VHDX and configure it on virtual machine as IDE below is the picture
LUNs are presented to the guest SQL01 and SQL02 and visible through disk management
When create the fail over cluster i am not getting the disk to add them to cluster
Getting the below error when validate the storage :
No Disks suitable for cluster disks were found, For diagnostic information about disks available run the Validate config wizard’..
Also , regarding this LUN how i can make them shared on the host side ?
I am using SQL 2012 SE with clustering on Windows server 2008 R2. Now I want migrate it to windows server 2012 with minimal down time. So I want to evict the passive node and add a new node with windows server 2012 and install sql server 2012 SE on the new passive node and perform a failover(make the node with 2012 OS as active) and then evict the new passive node and add another node with windows 2012 and then do the same thing?
I'm getting the following error when I go to create a cluster in the Failover Cluster Manager in Windows Server 2008.
"The address 10.10.10.111 is not valid for its associated network"
I'm following the instruction in the book for the 70-462 exam. There was a step that had me create a DNS A record for the address sql-cluster.contoso.com. The IP address was mapped to 10.10.10.111. I'm not sure if this is the culprit but its the only time I used that IP address in the setup.
Below are 2 screenshots. The first screenshot is the error. The second screenshot is my DNS console.
I saw following point on Technet article about RBS.The local FILESTREAM provider is supported only when it is used on local hard disk drives or an attached Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) device. You cannot use the local RBS FILESTREAM provider on remote storage devices such as network attached storage (NAS).It looks like that we cannot use FILESTREAM on Failover Cluster because to setup Failover Cluster we need to have NAS. But then the NAS is made available locally for Failover Cluster so FILESTREAM should work right?Found another article which talks about setting up FILESTREAM on Failover Cluster. URL...
The main objective is to have a third party program operate on a failover cluster. The OS is Windows Server 2012 Datacenter loaded on 2 nodes. A virtual node exists along with supporting disks. This client software uses a SQL Server database. SQL Server 2012 Enterprise is installed and operating in a failover environment. However the client software is not failing over. If the connection to node A is lost, SQL Server fails over to node B. But the client application does not.
What needs to occur in order to associate the client software with the failover cluster? This software has 6 services total installed. Some are referred to as servers - looks like to communicate between remote client computers and the database. What is the process to associate the client software with the failover?
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.
I have had a serious issue with a production AlwaysOn cluster whereby the service did not successfully transition to the secondary node and I cannot find the root cause of the issue.
Some details: It is a 2 node cluster (same datacenter) with a shared disk quorum, Windows Server 2012, both are virtual machines running on VMWare vSphere 5.5. SQL Server version is 2012 Enterprise SP2 CU6
The failover occurred because of a network incident (a spanning tree recalculation caused a connection timeout between both nodes). Initial entries in the SQL Log look normal for this event, for example:
05/08/2015 11:18:06: A connection timeout has occurred on a previously established connection to availability replica 'FIN-IE-PA078' with id [6910F4A9-87E7-4836-BA79-0F41BE90266D]. Either a networking or a firewall issue exists or the availability replica has transitioned to the resolving role. 05/08/2015 11:18:06: AlwaysOn Availability Groups connection with secondary database terminated for primary database 'UserManagement' on the availability replica with Replica ID: {6910f4a9-87e7-4836-ba79-0f41be90266d}. This is an informational message only. No user action is required.
[code]....
My interpretation of this is that the cluster failover attempts failed, because the network condition still persisted. The network interruption lasted approximately 2 minutes, and I would have expected the cluster to come back online at this point, after the restart delay period as suggested in the last entry in the error log. However this did not happen.
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?
