3 part question on Failover

1. If I have 2, seperate production SQL 2000 Servers, can I have 1 failover
server, that supports both production servers?
Example. sqlserver01 and sqlserver02 have differenct production databases.
sqlserver03 acts as a failover to either of the
servers
sqlserver02 fails, sqlserver03 picks up the traffic.
Or, does it have to be a 1 to 1 correlation, where I need 4 sqlservers to
support failover?
2. Do I have to have a license for the failover server?
3. Can I use a failover server to support other requests?
Example: sqlserver03 is failover for a production server. Can I run
reporting services against sqlserver03, so I don't put the additional load
on the production sqlserver? (Not to mention, it would always be up to date
with the latest data.)
Thanks.What technique did you plan to use for failover? Cluster, log shipping or re
plication? See
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oy/sqlhalp.mspx fo
r elaboration.
Or in SQL Server 2005, you also have the option of Database mirroring.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Kevin Antel" <kevina@.cqlcorp.com> wrote in message news:OOztrj$pFHA.1156@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.g
bl...
> 1. If I have 2, seperate production SQL 2000 Servers, can I have 1 failove
r server, that supports
> both production servers?
> Example. sqlserver01 and sqlserver02 have differenct production databases
.
> sqlserver03 acts as a failover to either of the ser
vers
> sqlserver02 fails, sqlserver03 picks up the traffic.
> Or, does it have to be a 1 to 1 correlation, where I need 4 sqlservers to
support failover?
> 2. Do I have to have a license for the failover server?
> 3. Can I use a failover server to support other requests?
> Example: sqlserver03 is failover for a production server. Can I run repor
ting services against
> sqlserver03, so I don't put the additional load on the production sqlserve
r? (Not to mention, it
> would always be up to date with the latest data.)
> Thanks.
>|||Good question, the intention is to go to SQL Server 2005 in the beginning to
mid 2006. So, the immediate needs will be Cluster, shipping or replication.
I don't believe I want clustering, and am not 100% clear between log
shipping and replication. I assume I want the log shipping, to have a
failover server, pickup the load, in the event of the primary server
failing. So, it needs to be real-time. (which I know 2005 will support
easily)
So, we'll say log shipping.
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:%23ia7Zp$pFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> What technique did you plan to use for failover? Cluster, log shipping or
> replication? See
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oy/sqlhalp.mspx
> for elaboration.
> Or in SQL Server 2005, you also have the option of Database mirroring.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Kevin Antel" <kevina@.cqlcorp.com> wrote in message
> news:OOztrj$pFHA.1156@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>|||Only cluster is real-time of the current options.
Log shipping will have a lag as much as the frequency you have between your
log backup and restores.
And you need to kick out all the users for each restore. In short, don't use
log shipping of you
want to do reporting of the standby database. Or use two databases, one for
standby and one for
reporting. I strongly encourage you to read the HA paper I posted, as there
are so many things to
consider...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Kevin Antel" <kevina@.cqlcorp.com> wrote in message news:eMH5bu$pFHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.g
bl...
> Good question, the intention is to go to SQL Server 2005 in the beginning
to mid 2006. So, the
> immediate needs will be Cluster, shipping or replication. I don't believe
I want clustering, and
> am not 100% clear between log shipping and replication. I assume I want t
he log shipping, to have
> a failover server, pickup the load, in the event of the primary server fai
ling. So, it needs to
> be real-time. (which I know 2005 will support easily)
> So, we'll say log shipping.
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote i
n message
> news:%23ia7Zp$pFHA.3732@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>|||I'll read, thanks, but do you have a suggestion as to what I should
consider, based on my questions?
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:O2VHty$pFHA.3544@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Only cluster is real-time of the current options.
> Log shipping will have a lag as much as the frequency you have between
> your log backup and restores. And you need to kick out all the users for
> each restore. In short, don't use log shipping of you want to do reporting
> of the standby database. Or use two databases, one for standby and one for
> reporting. I strongly encourage you to read the HA paper I posted, as
> there are so many things to consider...
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Kevin Antel" <kevina@.cqlcorp.com> wrote in message
> news:eMH5bu$pFHA.3104@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>|||We don't have enough information. All methods has downsides, and I don't kno
w how you prioritize
between the downsides of each method. Or the upsides either, of course. If y
ou read the paper, you
can post back with additional information making the question a bit more ...
qualified. :-)
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Kevin Antel" <kevina@.cqlcorp.com> wrote in message news:Oqph34$pFHA.3572@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.g
bl...
> I'll read, thanks, but do you have a suggestion as to what I should consid
er, based on my
> questions?
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote i
n message
> news:O2VHty$pFHA.3544@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||"Kevin Antel" wrote:

> 1. If I have 2, seperate production SQL 2000 Servers, can I have 1 failove
r
> server, that supports both production servers?
> Example. sqlserver01 and sqlserver02 have differenct production databases
.
> sqlserver03 acts as a failover to either of the
> servers
> sqlserver02 fails, sqlserver03 picks up the traffic.
> Or, does it have to be a 1 to 1 correlation, where I need 4 sqlservers to
> support failover?
> 2. Do I have to have a license for the failover server?
> 3. Can I use a failover server to support other requests?
> Example: sqlserver03 is failover for a production server. Can I run
> reporting services against sqlserver03, so I don't put the additional load
> on the production sqlserver? (Not to mention, it would always be up to da
te
> with the latest data.)
> Thanks.
>
>|||Sorry the blank reply...didn't realize they had profile verification and
reply on the same form.
I have a very similar scenario as Kevin, but only need that part 2 of his
question answered. Does the failover server require a seperate license?
Printable or downloadable doucumention would be greatly appreciated.
If I find the answer through any other means, I will post it here.
"Brian Norris" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> "Kevin Antel" wrote:
>