Yes. Fully supported.
Books on line is the best place to start. Beyond that, there are plenty of articles around such as this one ;
http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mssql/article.php/3444181
|||I'm not sure where you got your information but Active/Active Clustering IS NOT supported on SQL Server 2005.
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=603251&SiteID=1
|||That's definitely a news flash, because I have dozens of clustering implementations of SQL Server 2005 that have multiple instances installed on them. It is VERY definitely supported and has been possible since SQL Server 2000. This is NOT something that will ever go away.
However, there really is no such thing as an Active/Active SQL Server cluster. I can install a single instance of SQL Server into a cluster and I can install multiple instances of SQL Server into a cluster. Whether I decide to run all of the instances on a single node or run instances on each of the nodes is entirely up to my whim as well as being a completely transitory decision.
The post you are quoting has nothing to do with what you are asking. SQL Server has never allowed multiple instances to serve the same physical database. SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition enables a capability when combined with a SAN that does allow multiple instances to connect to the same database for read ONLY operations. Never have you been able to connect multiple instance to the same database and make changes. This capability has nothing at all to do with clustering.
|||The question was: Does SQL Server 2005 support Active/Active clustering?|||Clearly this is a issue of what you mean by Active/Active. Microsoft used that term a while ago to mean SQL instances running on all cluster nodes, as opposed to only 1 node with the other node(s) existing simply to take over in case something went wrong.
Obviously other RDBMS's have a different meaning for active/active.
No comments:
Post a Comment