Post reply

SQL 2005 clustering architecture

  • February 15, 2008 at 1:12 pm

    #179208

    so my boss and I have some disagreements on how to architecture this.

    my question here is basically what is the smartest and safest architecture. We are planning to deploy 4 active nodes and 2 passive. Base on my experience I feel it is better to do a pair of 2+1, rather then 4+2. I would rather build out two seperate cluster, instead of putting all my eggs into one basket. If there were issues with clustering, quorum, network etc... it will be less of an impact, compared to a 4+2.

    your thoughts?

  • February 18, 2008 at 11:03 pm

    #779572

    no one?

  • February 19, 2008 at 9:51 pm

    #780076

    Without knowing a whole lot more about your environment, data, requirements, etc. it's pretty much impossible for anybody to provide an opinion... which is probably why you haven't seen any responses.

    As for a (2+1)*2 vs 4+2 rule of thumb, there isn't one, it depends entirely on what you're trying to accomplish.

    Joe

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply