Hi All,
I just returned from a Microsoft OEM products seminar and during a dicussion focused on product options as consulting services, the Microsoft employees began to discuss SQL server instances in terms of active and passive roles.
According to them, you can have a second server set up and running on the network running ONLY SQL. In this case, you can apparently assign it a role as "passive" and configure it for a failover if the "active" db goes down or whatever.
Of course, db replication takes place the whole time..but that is to be expected. To be honest, I am not sure about the cost of a server license, but they did say that there would be no license requirement for the "passive" instance of SQL, and that would be the most expensive software burden in thet system if it were required.
I know we have collectively discussed having secondary machines with openedge preinstalled so if the main server would go down, you copy over the latest .1 file and change the computer name...and others have discussed clustering....but on the surface, this seems to be a scenario that would be less expensive and less difficult to setup and maintain.
I personally do not know much about Microsoft clustering...
And I am unsure of the details, and am kind of curious what would happen if the enter SQL server dies and it happens to host the Vantage code....but I am sure that someone in this group could give us some good pertinent information..
But, I thought it might be interesting as a consideration for redundancy and lower cost.
Carey
_________________________________________________________________
It�s tax season, make sure to follow these few simple tips
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/PreparationTips/PreparationTips.aspx?icid=WLMartagline
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I just returned from a Microsoft OEM products seminar and during a dicussion focused on product options as consulting services, the Microsoft employees began to discuss SQL server instances in terms of active and passive roles.
According to them, you can have a second server set up and running on the network running ONLY SQL. In this case, you can apparently assign it a role as "passive" and configure it for a failover if the "active" db goes down or whatever.
Of course, db replication takes place the whole time..but that is to be expected. To be honest, I am not sure about the cost of a server license, but they did say that there would be no license requirement for the "passive" instance of SQL, and that would be the most expensive software burden in thet system if it were required.
I know we have collectively discussed having secondary machines with openedge preinstalled so if the main server would go down, you copy over the latest .1 file and change the computer name...and others have discussed clustering....but on the surface, this seems to be a scenario that would be less expensive and less difficult to setup and maintain.
I personally do not know much about Microsoft clustering...
And I am unsure of the details, and am kind of curious what would happen if the enter SQL server dies and it happens to host the Vantage code....but I am sure that someone in this group could give us some good pertinent information..
But, I thought it might be interesting as a consideration for redundancy and lower cost.
Carey
_________________________________________________________________
It�s tax season, make sure to follow these few simple tips
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/PreparationTips/PreparationTips.aspx?icid=WLMartagline
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]