Log Shipping with SQL Server 2000 STD Edition?

Hi SQL Server MVPs,
I just get into a sql server 2000 (std edition) environment, and they will
stay with the std edition for a while. Here are some questions about the Log
shipping:
1. Does SQL server 2000 STD version support Log Shipping?
(I know EE Edition and Developer Edition do.)
2. If tasks like the Transaction Log backup, transfering log from primary
server to secondary server, restore the log from the standby server were all
handled by scheduled scripts, and the syslogins was transfered by DTS, will
this approach work in a SQL server 2k std environment? Will the logins
resolving process work?
3. How can we setup the Log shipping monitor in SQL 2000 STD server?
Your expertise confirming information and any possible instruction documents
will be appreciated.
FDHi,
(a) Log-shipping is not supported in standard version of SQL server. However
I have read that basic log-shipping is supported in the standard version,
didn't get chance to get to know more about this.
(b) IMO, this approach should work, as long as the database is in the
NORECOVERY mode in the standby server.
HTH
Yogish|||The Enterprise Edition (and dev) just have a wizard to set
it all up for you. It doesn't mean you can't write your own
version on any edition. You can find sample scripts in the
SQL Server Resource Kit - I think it's called Simple Log
Shipper. You can also find examples of implementations of
custom log shipping routines on various web sites.
You'll need to create your own method for monitoring log
shipping.
-Sue
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:43:07 -0800, "Frank"
<Frank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Hi SQL Server MVPs,
>I just get into a sql server 2000 (std edition) environment, and they will
>stay with the std edition for a while. Here are some questions about the Lo
g
>shipping:
>1. Does SQL server 2000 STD version support Log Shipping?
> (I know EE Edition and Developer Edition do.)
>2. If tasks like the Transaction Log backup, transfering log from primary
>server to secondary server, restore the log from the standby server were al
l
>handled by scheduled scripts, and the syslogins was transfered by DTS, will
>this approach work in a SQL server 2k std environment? Will the logins
>resolving process work?
>3. How can we setup the Log shipping monitor in SQL 2000 STD server?
>Your expertise confirming information and any possible instruction document
s
>will be appreciated.
>FD|||1) Yes. You have to set it up yourself, however.
2) Yes and Yes. By the way, you can move the logins using this method:
HOW TO: Transfer Logins and Passwords Between Instances of SQL Server
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=246133
3) To monitor the process you could use the jobs that perform the log
backups and restores. Have them email you if there is a failure. This is a
great way to email from SQL Server: XPSMTP --
http://sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htm
You may find these KB articles helpful:
314515 INF: Frequently Asked Questions - SQL Server 2000 - Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314515
323135 INF: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - How to Set Up Log Shipping (White
Paper)
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=323135
325220 Support WebCast: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=325220
821786 Support WebCast: Microsoft SQL Server 2000: Using Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=821786
321247 HOW TO: Configure Security for Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321247
329133 INF: Troubleshooting SQL Server 2000 Log Shipping "Out of Sync"
Errors
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=329133
Keith
"Frank" <Frank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BBB0D86B-D4C9-4FFA-A496-C60FE8DEE0D3@.microsoft.com...
> Hi SQL Server MVPs,
> I just get into a sql server 2000 (std edition) environment, and they will
> stay with the std edition for a while. Here are some questions about the
Log
> shipping:
> 1. Does SQL server 2000 STD version support Log Shipping?
> (I know EE Edition and Developer Edition do.)
> 2. If tasks like the Transaction Log backup, transfering log from primary
> server to secondary server, restore the log from the standby server were
all
> handled by scheduled scripts, and the syslogins was transfered by DTS,
will
> this approach work in a SQL server 2k std environment? Will the logins
> resolving process work?
> 3. How can we setup the Log shipping monitor in SQL 2000 STD server?
> Your expertise confirming information and any possible instruction
documents
> will be appreciated.
> FD|||All,
Thanks for the confirming information. I will start working in our testing
environment.
Frank
"Frank" wrote:

> Hi SQL Server MVPs,
> I just get into a sql server 2000 (std edition) environment, and they will
> stay with the std edition for a while. Here are some questions about the L
og
> shipping:
> 1. Does SQL server 2000 STD version support Log Shipping?
> (I know EE Edition and Developer Edition do.)
> 2. If tasks like the Transaction Log backup, transfering log from primary
> server to secondary server, restore the log from the standby server were a
ll
> handled by scheduled scripts, and the syslogins was transfered by DTS, wil
l
> this approach work in a SQL server 2k std environment? Will the logins
> resolving process work?
> 3. How can we setup the Log shipping monitor in SQL 2000 STD server?
> Your expertise confirming information and any possible instruction documen
ts
> will be appreciated.
> FD

Log Shipping with SQL Server 2000 STD Edition?

Hi SQL Server MVPs,
I just get into a sql server 2000 (std edition) environment, and they will
stay with the std edition for a while. Here are some questions about the Log
shipping:
1. Does SQL server 2000 STD version support Log Shipping?
(I know EE Edition and Developer Edition do.)
2. If tasks like the Transaction Log backup, transfering log from primary
server to secondary server, restore the log from the standby server were all
handled by scheduled scripts, and the syslogins was transfered by DTS, will
this approach work in a SQL server 2k std environment? Will the logins
resolving process work?
3. How can we setup the Log shipping monitor in SQL 2000 STD server?
Your expertise confirming information and any possible instruction documents
will be appreciated.
FDHi,
(a) Log-shipping is not supported in standard version of SQL server. However
I have read that basic log-shipping is supported in the standard version,
didn't get chance to get to know more about this.
(b) IMO, this approach should work, as long as the database is in the
NORECOVERY mode in the standby server.
HTH
Yogish|||The Enterprise Edition (and dev) just have a wizard to set
it all up for you. It doesn't mean you can't write your own
version on any edition. You can find sample scripts in the
SQL Server Resource Kit - I think it's called Simple Log
Shipper. You can also find examples of implementations of
custom log shipping routines on various web sites.
You'll need to create your own method for monitoring log
shipping.
-Sue
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:43:07 -0800, "Frank"
<Frank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>Hi SQL Server MVPs,
>I just get into a sql server 2000 (std edition) environment, and they will
>stay with the std edition for a while. Here are some questions about the Log
>shipping:
>1. Does SQL server 2000 STD version support Log Shipping?
> (I know EE Edition and Developer Edition do.)
>2. If tasks like the Transaction Log backup, transfering log from primary
>server to secondary server, restore the log from the standby server were all
>handled by scheduled scripts, and the syslogins was transfered by DTS, will
>this approach work in a SQL server 2k std environment? Will the logins
>resolving process work?
>3. How can we setup the Log shipping monitor in SQL 2000 STD server?
>Your expertise confirming information and any possible instruction documents
>will be appreciated.
>FD|||1) Yes. You have to set it up yourself, however.
2) Yes and Yes. By the way, you can move the logins using this method:
HOW TO: Transfer Logins and Passwords Between Instances of SQL Server
http://www.support.microsoft.com/?id=246133
3) To monitor the process you could use the jobs that perform the log
backups and restores. Have them email you if there is a failure. This is a
great way to email from SQL Server: XPSMTP --
http://sqldev.net/xp/xpsmtp.htm
You may find these KB articles helpful:
314515 INF: Frequently Asked Questions - SQL Server 2000 - Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314515
323135 INF: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - How to Set Up Log Shipping (White
Paper)
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=323135
325220 Support WebCast: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=325220
821786 Support WebCast: Microsoft SQL Server 2000: Using Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=821786
321247 HOW TO: Configure Security for Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=321247
329133 INF: Troubleshooting SQL Server 2000 Log Shipping "Out of Sync"
Errors
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=329133
--
Keith
"Frank" <Frank@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BBB0D86B-D4C9-4FFA-A496-C60FE8DEE0D3@.microsoft.com...
> Hi SQL Server MVPs,
> I just get into a sql server 2000 (std edition) environment, and they will
> stay with the std edition for a while. Here are some questions about the
Log
> shipping:
> 1. Does SQL server 2000 STD version support Log Shipping?
> (I know EE Edition and Developer Edition do.)
> 2. If tasks like the Transaction Log backup, transfering log from primary
> server to secondary server, restore the log from the standby server were
all
> handled by scheduled scripts, and the syslogins was transfered by DTS,
will
> this approach work in a SQL server 2k std environment? Will the logins
> resolving process work?
> 3. How can we setup the Log shipping monitor in SQL 2000 STD server?
> Your expertise confirming information and any possible instruction
documents
> will be appreciated.
> FD|||All,
Thanks for the confirming information. I will start working in our testing
environment.
Frank
"Frank" wrote:
> Hi SQL Server MVPs,
> I just get into a sql server 2000 (std edition) environment, and they will
> stay with the std edition for a while. Here are some questions about the Log
> shipping:
> 1. Does SQL server 2000 STD version support Log Shipping?
> (I know EE Edition and Developer Edition do.)
> 2. If tasks like the Transaction Log backup, transfering log from primary
> server to secondary server, restore the log from the standby server were all
> handled by scheduled scripts, and the syslogins was transfered by DTS, will
> this approach work in a SQL server 2k std environment? Will the logins
> resolving process work?
> 3. How can we setup the Log shipping monitor in SQL 2000 STD server?
> Your expertise confirming information and any possible instruction documents
> will be appreciated.
> FD

Log Shipping with HOLD

I had an interview question the other day I don't understand. He asked about
types of replication and when you would use them. One of the options was "log
shipping with hold" and why?
I can't think of a good reason to do this, as with that type of replication,
you would want the replicant/subscriber to be as close as possible to the
primary/publisher. Otherwise, why not just use snapshot?
Thoughts please.
JayKon wrote:
> I had an interview question the other day I don't understand. He asked about
> types of replication and when you would use them. One of the options was "log
> shipping with hold" and why?
> I can't think of a good reason to do this, as with that type of replication,
> you would want the replicant/subscriber to be as close as possible to the
> primary/publisher. Otherwise, why not just use snapshot?
> Thoughts please.
For a standby or "disaster recovery" server, having a delay in the
restore process can help protect from logical disasters, i.e. somebody
nukes a million rows in a table by accident. You have time to prevent
that mistake from reaching your standby machine in case you need it.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com
|||My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
recover.
Anyway, thanks Tracy, I should have thought of that.
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> JayKon wrote:
> For a standby or "disaster recovery" server, having a delay in the
> restore process can help protect from logical disasters, i.e. somebody
> nukes a million rows in a table by accident. You have time to prevent
> that mistake from reaching your standby machine in case you need it.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>
|||"JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B04C4FDD-89F3-468E-8626-B335D964D61F@.microsoft.com...
> My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
> thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
> restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
> recover.
>
Also,
Using Secondary Servers for Query Processing
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189572.aspx
David
|||JayKon wrote:
> My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
> thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
> restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
> recover.
>
All true, but if you're in a low- or no-downtime environment, doing
weekly full/hourly log backups, with a two-hour delay in log shipping,
if something happens on Thursday, will it take longer to restore the
full and 4 days of logs, or two hours of logs (up to the failure)?
It's just another tool, another way of protecting yourself...
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com
|||David, the question was not about uses of replication, but rather the "with
hold" option.
"David Browne" wrote:

>
> "JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B04C4FDD-89F3-468E-8626-B335D964D61F@.microsoft.com...
> Also,
> Using Secondary Servers for Query Processing
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189572.aspx
>
> David
>
|||"JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6BA5BF29-8848-46C4-9C8A-A238AAB4E5E9@.microsoft.com...
> David, the question was not about uses of replication, but rather the
> "with
> hold" option.
>
My point, perhaps not really explained, was that the secondary database is
available for querying only while you are not restoring logs. If, for
instance, you only restore logs at the end of the day, you can use the log
shipping secondary server for point-in-time reporting.
David

Log Shipping with HOLD

I had an interview question the other day I don't understand. He asked about
types of replication and when you would use them. One of the options was "lo
g
shipping with hold" and why?
I can't think of a good reason to do this, as with that type of replication,
you would want the replicant/subscriber to be as close as possible to the
primary/publisher. Otherwise, why not just use snapshot?
Thoughts please.JayKon wrote:
> I had an interview question the other day I don't understand. He asked abo
ut
> types of replication and when you would use them. One of the options was "
log
> shipping with hold" and why?
> I can't think of a good reason to do this, as with that type of replicatio
n,
> you would want the replicant/subscriber to be as close as possible to the
> primary/publisher. Otherwise, why not just use snapshot?
> Thoughts please.
For a standby or "disaster recovery" server, having a delay in the
restore process can help protect from logical disasters, i.e. somebody
nukes a million rows in a table by accident. You have time to prevent
that mistake from reaching your standby machine in case you need it.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
recover.
Anyway, thanks Tracy, I should have thought of that.
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> JayKon wrote:
> For a standby or "disaster recovery" server, having a delay in the
> restore process can help protect from logical disasters, i.e. somebody
> nukes a million rows in a table by accident. You have time to prevent
> that mistake from reaching your standby machine in case you need it.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||"JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B04C4FDD-89F3-468E-8626-B335D964D61F@.microsoft.com...
> My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
> thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
> restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
> recover.
>
Also,
Using Secondary Servers for Query Processing
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189572.aspx
David|||JayKon wrote:
> My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
> thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
> restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
> recover.
>
All true, but if you're in a low- or no-downtime environment, doing
weekly full/hourly log backups, with a two-hour delay in log shipping,
if something happens on Thursday, will it take longer to restore the
full and 4 days of logs, or two hours of logs (up to the failure)?
It's just another tool, another way of protecting yourself...
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||David, the question was not about uses of replication, but rather the "with
hold" option.
"David Browne" wrote:

>
> "JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B04C4FDD-89F3-468E-8626-B335D964D61F@.microsoft.com...
> Also,
> Using Secondary Servers for Query Processing
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189572.aspx
>
> David
>|||"JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6BA5BF29-8848-46C4-9C8A-A238AAB4E5E9@.microsoft.com...
> David, the question was not about uses of replication, but rather the
> "with
> hold" option.
>
My point, perhaps not really explained, was that the secondary database is
available for querying only while you are not restoring logs. If, for
instance, you only restore logs at the end of the day, you can use the log
shipping secondary server for point-in-time reporting.
David

Log Shipping with HOLD

I had an interview question the other day I don't understand. He asked about
types of replication and when you would use them. One of the options was "log
shipping with hold" and why?
I can't think of a good reason to do this, as with that type of replication,
you would want the replicant/subscriber to be as close as possible to the
primary/publisher. Otherwise, why not just use snapshot?
Thoughts please.JayKon wrote:
> I had an interview question the other day I don't understand. He asked about
> types of replication and when you would use them. One of the options was "log
> shipping with hold" and why?
> I can't think of a good reason to do this, as with that type of replication,
> you would want the replicant/subscriber to be as close as possible to the
> primary/publisher. Otherwise, why not just use snapshot?
> Thoughts please.
For a standby or "disaster recovery" server, having a delay in the
restore process can help protect from logical disasters, i.e. somebody
nukes a million rows in a table by accident. You have time to prevent
that mistake from reaching your standby machine in case you need it.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
recover.
Anyway, thanks Tracy, I should have thought of that.
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:
> JayKon wrote:
> > I had an interview question the other day I don't understand. He asked about
> > types of replication and when you would use them. One of the options was "log
> > shipping with hold" and why?
> >
> > I can't think of a good reason to do this, as with that type of replication,
> > you would want the replicant/subscriber to be as close as possible to the
> > primary/publisher. Otherwise, why not just use snapshot?
> >
> > Thoughts please.
> For a standby or "disaster recovery" server, having a delay in the
> restore process can help protect from logical disasters, i.e. somebody
> nukes a million rows in a table by accident. You have time to prevent
> that mistake from reaching your standby machine in case you need it.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||"JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B04C4FDD-89F3-468E-8626-B335D964D61F@.microsoft.com...
> My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
> thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
> restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
> recover.
>
Also,
Using Secondary Servers for Query Processing
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189572.aspx
David|||JayKon wrote:
> My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
> thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
> restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
> recover.
>
All true, but if you're in a low- or no-downtime environment, doing
weekly full/hourly log backups, with a two-hour delay in log shipping,
if something happens on Thursday, will it take longer to restore the
full and 4 days of logs, or two hours of logs (up to the failure)?
It's just another tool, another way of protecting yourself...
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||David, the question was not about uses of replication, but rather the "with
hold" option.
"David Browne" wrote:
>
> "JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B04C4FDD-89F3-468E-8626-B335D964D61F@.microsoft.com...
> > My first reaction is "DOH!", that makes sense. But after that, I wonder if
> > thats really such a good idea. After all, you can still do a point-in-time
> > restore, or even restore to a seperate DB and manually extract the rows to
> > recover.
> >
> Also,
> Using Secondary Servers for Query Processing
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189572.aspx
>
> David
>|||"JayKon" <JayKon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6BA5BF29-8848-46C4-9C8A-A238AAB4E5E9@.microsoft.com...
> David, the question was not about uses of replication, but rather the
> "with
> hold" option.
>
My point, perhaps not really explained, was that the secondary database is
available for querying only while you are not restoring logs. If, for
instance, you only restore logs at the end of the day, you can use the log
shipping secondary server for point-in-time reporting.
Davidsql

Log shipping with clustering

We would like to implement 2 node active-passive clustering coupled
with log shipping. Clustering is for high availability and log
shipping for DR purpose. Do we have any white papers for this kind of
setup? Is it possible to host the log shiiping secondary database on
the inactive cluster server? Thouigh it doesn't server the DR purpose,
we are exploring all different methods. Please share your ideas
barbara wrote:
> We would like to implement 2 node active-passive clustering coupled
> with log shipping. Clustering is for high availability and log
> shipping for DR purpose. Do we have any white papers for this kind of
> setup?
SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../failclus.mspx
How to setup Log Shipping
http://support.microsoft.com/support...ppingFinal.asp
SQL Server Resource Kit (Part 4 is dedicated to Hig Availability)
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...s/default.mspx
SQL Server High Availability Resources
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...ailability.asp

> Is it possible to host the log shiiping secondary database on
> the inactive cluster server?
Yes, you can setup a stand-alone istance and ship one (or more) clustered
database to this istance but is preferable to setup an external box for log
shipping purpose

> Thouigh it doesn't server the DR purpose,
> we are exploring all different methods. Please share your ideas
Log Shipping can increase high availabilty because it reduce the time to
became operational when a disaster on primary server happen. In particular
Clustering
- high level of fault tolerance
- automatic failure
- high cost
Log shipping
- manual failure
- scale out (you can use secondary server as read-only server)
- low cost
Clustering increase the availability but Log Shipping reduce down-time if a
failure occur
Bye
Luca Bianchi
Microsoft MVP - SQL Server
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com
http://italy.mvps.org
|||Luca,
Thanks for the info. I've looked at all these articles before. If I
create standby on same server as cluser node (business doesn't want to
spend on another server), how do I failover to this? How does the
client connects to
standby? What name does it uses because the cluster node also exists
on the same server.
"Luca Bianchi" <rightjoinREMOVE_THIS@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2qajjjFs3b8qU1@.uni-berlin.de>...
> barbara wrote:
> SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../failclus.mspx
> How to setup Log Shipping
> http://support.microsoft.com/support...ppingFinal.asp
> SQL Server Resource Kit (Part 4 is dedicated to Hig Availability)
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...s/default.mspx
> SQL Server High Availability Resources
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...ailability.asp
>
> Yes, you can setup a stand-alone istance and ship one (or more) clustered
> database to this istance but is preferable to setup an external box for log
> shipping purpose
>
> Log Shipping can increase high availabilty because it reduce the time to
> became operational when a disaster on primary server happen. In particular
> Clustering
> - high level of fault tolerance
> - automatic failure
> - high cost
> Log shipping
> - manual failure
> - scale out (you can use secondary server as read-only server)
> - low cost
> Clustering increase the availability but Log Shipping reduce down-time if a
> failure occur
> Bye
|||I am confused? What would you gain in availability by log shipping to
another cluster node? I would log ship to another (possibly lower
performing) server in another location. Copying data in a tight circle
won't really gain anything in availability, which is the real goal here.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"barbara" <barbara_2003@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5cd01256.0409091029.5a87adcc@.posting.google.c om...
> Luca,
> Thanks for the info. I've looked at all these articles before. If I
> create standby on same server as cluser node (business doesn't want to
> spend on another server), how do I failover to this? How does the
> client connects to
> standby? What name does it uses because the cluster node also exists
> on the same server.
>
> "Luca Bianchi" <rightjoinREMOVE_THIS@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<2qajjjFs3b8qU1@.uni-berlin.de>...[vbcol=seagreen]
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../failclus.mspx[vbcol=seagreen]
http://support.microsoft.com/support...ppingFinal.asp[vbcol=seagreen]
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...s/default.mspx[vbcol=seagreen]
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...ailability.asp[vbcol=seagreen]
clustered[vbcol=seagreen]
log[vbcol=seagreen]
particular[vbcol=seagreen]
if a[vbcol=seagreen]
|||"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message
news:epFRtxplEHA.2968@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> I am confused? What would you gain in availability by log shipping to
> another cluster node? I would log ship to another (possibly lower
> performing) server in another location. Copying data in a tight circle
> won't really gain anything in availability, which is the real goal here.
>
Actually I can think of a case.... physical disk corruption.
We have a DB where one block of data on teh disk has a bad CRC. This
prevents backups, etc.
We didn't realize the extent of the problem until too late so a restore from
a recent backup is not possible.
In this situation, something like what barbara's proposing might have been
very useful to us.
Having said that, log-shipping to a different machine is even better.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "barbara" <barbara_2003@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5cd01256.0409091029.5a87adcc@.posting.google.c om...
> news:<2qajjjFs3b8qU1@.uni-berlin.de>...
of
>
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../failclus.mspx
>
http://support.microsoft.com/support...ppingFinal.asp
>
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...s/default.mspx[vbcol=seagreen]
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinf...ailability.asp
> clustered
for[vbcol=seagreen]
> log
to
> particular
> if a
>
|||barbara wrote:
> Luca,
> Thanks for the info. I've looked at all these articles before. If I
> create standby on same server as cluser node (business doesn't want to
> spend on another server), how do I failover to this? How does the
> client connects to
> standby? What name does it uses because the cluster node also exists
> on the same server.
I agree completely with Geoff and Greg about their consideration. High
Availability has a cost. If you don't consider it, probably you don't need a
cluster solution.
By the way you have to refer to the clustered instance with its VIRTUAL
SERVER NAME that is different by the name of two node machine. The stand
alone instance could be referred by the traditional host name.
Imagine that you have a clustered node called NODE1 and the other node
called NODE2 (either with its own IP address). When you setup a clustered
(at operating system level) you have to assign, for the clustered, one
VIRTUAL SERVER NAME and one VIRTUAL IP ADDRESS (of the same class of both
node). When you install the virtual server instance of SQL Server you have
to provide another VIRTUAL SERVER NAME and another VIRTUAL IP ADDRESS for
SQL Server.
For example
The machine that form the cluster are:
NODE1 (10.0.0.1)
NODE2 (10.0.0.2)
When you create a clustered at Windows 2000/2003 level you can assign the
following name and ip address to the virtual server
W2KCLUSTER (10.0.0.3)
And then you setup SQL Server in a clustered instance creating a new virtual
server name with its virtual ip address
SQLCLUSTER (10.0.0.4)
If you install a stand-alone instance on NODE1 you can refer to the
clustered instance with the clustered instance name (that could be run on
NODE1 or NODE2) using its name or ip address (SQLCLUSTER or 10.0.0.4). If
you would connect to the stand alone instance you can connect to it without
considering the virtual server name but using NODE1.
Bye
Luca Bianchi
Microsoft MVP - SQL Server
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com
http://italy.mvps.org
|||Thanks for the good explanation. How do we change the client
configuration to point clients from SQLCLUSTER to node1? Oracle uses
LDAP/ONAMES for name resolution which is easier to change. Do we have
any for sql server? Is DNS name change is only option available? How
does it take care of caching at client level?
"Luca Bianchi" <rightjoinREMOVE_THIS@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2qd1hrFueik4U1@.uni-berlin.de>...
> barbara wrote:
> I agree completely with Geoff and Greg about their consideration. High
> Availability has a cost. If you don't consider it, probably you don't need a
> cluster solution.
> By the way you have to refer to the clustered instance with its VIRTUAL
> SERVER NAME that is different by the name of two node machine. The stand
> alone instance could be referred by the traditional host name.
> Imagine that you have a clustered node called NODE1 and the other node
> called NODE2 (either with its own IP address). When you setup a clustered
> (at operating system level) you have to assign, for the clustered, one
> VIRTUAL SERVER NAME and one VIRTUAL IP ADDRESS (of the same class of both
> node). When you install the virtual server instance of SQL Server you have
> to provide another VIRTUAL SERVER NAME and another VIRTUAL IP ADDRESS for
> SQL Server.
> For example
> The machine that form the cluster are:
> NODE1 (10.0.0.1)
> NODE2 (10.0.0.2)
> When you create a clustered at Windows 2000/2003 level you can assign the
> following name and ip address to the virtual server
> W2KCLUSTER (10.0.0.3)
> And then you setup SQL Server in a clustered instance creating a new virtual
> server name with its virtual ip address
> SQLCLUSTER (10.0.0.4)
> If you install a stand-alone instance on NODE1 you can refer to the
> clustered instance with the clustered instance name (that could be run on
> NODE1 or NODE2) using its name or ip address (SQLCLUSTER or 10.0.0.4). If
> you would connect to the stand alone instance you can connect to it without
> considering the virtual server name but using NODE1.
> Bye
|||Currently there is no automagic client redirection. You can handle this in
a variety of ways. You can put the server portion of the conneciotn string
in a registry entry or an XML document and push changes otu to all the
clients. You can do a DNS alias redirect, but as you noted, there is the
client caching issue. This is one reason clustering is so useful. The
clients reconnect using the same connection string after a failover.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"barbara" <barbara_2003@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5cd01256.0409100354.23e1b6a4@.posting.google.c om...
> Thanks for the good explanation. How do we change the client
> configuration to point clients from SQLCLUSTER to node1? Oracle uses
> LDAP/ONAMES for name resolution which is easier to change. Do we have
> any for sql server? Is DNS name change is only option available? How
> does it take care of caching at client level?
>
> "Luca Bianchi" <rightjoinREMOVE_THIS@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<2qd1hrFueik4U1@.uni-berlin.de>...[vbcol=seagreen]
need a[vbcol=seagreen]
clustered[vbcol=seagreen]
both[vbcol=seagreen]
have[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
virtual[vbcol=seagreen]
on[vbcol=seagreen]
If[vbcol=seagreen]
without[vbcol=seagreen]
|||That's the beauty of clustering. The client doesn't have to do anything,
except reconnect. The virtual server name and IP are both moved to the
other node. The client doesn't reference the node directly - only through
the virtual name and IP.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"barbara" <barbara_2003@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5cd01256.0409100354.23e1b6a4@.posting.google.c om...
Thanks for the good explanation. How do we change the client
configuration to point clients from SQLCLUSTER to node1? Oracle uses
LDAP/ONAMES for name resolution which is easier to change. Do we have
any for sql server? Is DNS name change is only option available? How
does it take care of caching at client level?
"Luca Bianchi" <rightjoinREMOVE_THIS@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<2qd1hrFueik4U1@.uni-berlin.de>...
> barbara wrote:
> I agree completely with Geoff and Greg about their consideration. High
> Availability has a cost. If you don't consider it, probably you don't need
a
> cluster solution.
> By the way you have to refer to the clustered instance with its VIRTUAL
> SERVER NAME that is different by the name of two node machine. The stand
> alone instance could be referred by the traditional host name.
> Imagine that you have a clustered node called NODE1 and the other node
> called NODE2 (either with its own IP address). When you setup a clustered
> (at operating system level) you have to assign, for the clustered, one
> VIRTUAL SERVER NAME and one VIRTUAL IP ADDRESS (of the same class of both
> node). When you install the virtual server instance of SQL Server you have
> to provide another VIRTUAL SERVER NAME and another VIRTUAL IP ADDRESS for
> SQL Server.
> For example
> The machine that form the cluster are:
> NODE1 (10.0.0.1)
> NODE2 (10.0.0.2)
> When you create a clustered at Windows 2000/2003 level you can assign the
> following name and ip address to the virtual server
> W2KCLUSTER (10.0.0.3)
> And then you setup SQL Server in a clustered instance creating a new
virtual
> server name with its virtual ip address
> SQLCLUSTER (10.0.0.4)
> If you install a stand-alone instance on NODE1 you can refer to the
> clustered instance with the clustered instance name (that could be run on
> NODE1 or NODE2) using its name or ip address (SQLCLUSTER or 10.0.0.4). If
> you would connect to the stand alone instance you can connect to it
without
> considering the virtual server name but using NODE1.
> Bye
|||Does microsoft know this problem? In enterprise environment, it is
very hard to push the DNS change to all clients. When they offer log
shipping, there should be an easy way for client redirection. I feel
this is is the biggest
drawback with sql server. How do you push XML or registry to all
clients? Do we need to have list of all clinet machine IPs?
Any other ideas in this subject is well appreciated.
Thanks
"Geoff N. Hiten" <SRDBA@.Careerbuilder.com> wrote in message news:<O6i6nwzlEHA.3608@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Currently there is no automagic client redirection. You can handle this in
> a variety of ways. You can put the server portion of the conneciotn string
> in a registry entry or an XML document and push changes otu to all the
> clients. You can do a DNS alias redirect, but as you noted, there is the
> client caching issue. This is one reason clustering is so useful. The
> clients reconnect using the same connection string after a failover.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Senior Database Administrator
> Careerbuilder.com
> I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
> www.sqlpass.org
> "barbara" <barbara_2003@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5cd01256.0409100354.23e1b6a4@.posting.google.c om...
> news:<2qd1hrFueik4U1@.uni-berlin.de>...
> need a
> clustered
> both
> have
> for
> the
> virtual
> on
> If
> without

Log Shipping with clustered database.

Hi,
We are running SQL Server Failover cluster in Active/Passive mode.
Now, we want to setup DR server for this clustered database using
Log shipping.
But my concern is, can we do log shipping with clustered database ?
and the answer of this question is Yes then Please let me know How ?
Thanks & Regards,
Sajid C.
Yep...you can. Just like how you do it in a non-clustered instance. The only
problem you will have in here is if you want to be notified thru email if
your restore jobs fail as MAPI is not supported in a clustered environment.
MCP MCDBA MCAD MCSD MCT MCTS MCITP:DBA
"Helping people grow and develop their full potential as God has plan for
them"
"csajid@.gmail.com" wrote:

> Hi,
> We are running SQL Server Failover cluster in Active/Passive mode.
> Now, we want to setup DR server for this clustered database using
> Log shipping.
> But my concern is, can we do log shipping with clustered database ?
> and the answer of this question is Yes then Please let me know How ?
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Sajid C.
>
|||Hi,
Thanks for your reply.
Can you please provide me some document or any link for the same.
What are the necessary steps which should i take to do this task.
Thanks & Regards,
Sajid C.
bass_player wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Yep...you can. Just like how you do it in a non-clustered instance. The only
> problem you will have in here is if you want to be notified thru email if
> your restore jobs fail as MAPI is not supported in a clustered environment.
> --
> MCP MCDBA MCAD MCSD MCT MCTS MCITP:DBA
> "Helping people grow and develop their full potential as God has plan for
> them"
>
> "csajid@.gmail.com" wrote: