Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
AskSQLTeam
Ask SQLTeam Question
0 Posts |
 Posted - 2004-06-09 : 07:16:31
|
| Mike Doyle writes "This may be a softball question, but I really could use expert opinions. We are a MSSQL shop and we are planning to upgrade our single MSSQL server to a fault tolerant solution.The two ideas proposed for fault tolerance are 1. Two identical systems on the same subnet using logshipping2. a cluster solution. (msa 500 or msa 1000 solution)The goal here is to maximize fault tolerance. We currently run a quad 6500Mhz xeon system with an external disk array with Windows2000 and SQL7. We would be moving to windows2003, sql2000 and a dual 3.2 Ghz xeon hardware. I was just hoping to know what the industry standard solution for achieving best fault tolerance with mission critical databases for small companies. When something goes wrong, I want to be on a path that is already well worn.Thanks!" |
|
|
mr_mist
Grunnio
1870 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-09 : 08:37:13
|
| Log Shipping may be cheaper and possibly easier to set up, but you would not have the quick and easy failover that a cluster provides. I think you may have to buy Enterprise edition or better of windows 2003 server to have clustering.For best effect, you need to consider network redundancy and external location.-------Moo. :) |
 |
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2004-06-09 : 12:34:45
|
| Log shipping is for disaster recovery so you log ship to a remote site, clustering is for hardware problems at one site. For a highly available solution, you should have both implemented.Tara |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fault Tolerance and MSSQL