Need advise on clustering

[pie8ter]

I've never setup a cluster, but I am tasked with implementing one. I have been doing a lot of research on this topic over the past month. But I am not sure how to go about planning this project.

Requirement:
-Loadbalance two IIS 6.0 servers running windows 2003 standard/sp1 (active/passive)
-Cluster two SQL 2005 standard servers running on windows 2003 EE/SP1 (active/passive)

Websites in IIS 6.0 will use SQL cluster for database access.

I am planning to use a hardware loadbalancer for IIS (Loadmaster 1500). Are there other options in the $2500 price range? Or should I get the windows 2003 EE and do a NLB? I think this solution will cost me more.

I understand that I need a shared disk array (JBOD) for SQL clustering (200gb and RAID5). I am looking for inexpensive solution as well. Most likely either SATA2 or SCSI interface (Y-interface).

Since the failover IIS server and secondary node in SQL cluster will be in passive mode, I decided to use our existing low end servers for passive mode and purchase two new high end servers for active servers. But I am concerned about Microsoft's support for this type of setup. I am not even sure if clustering will work with two nodes having different hardware architecture.

Also, we are purchasing a NAS device with Windows 2003 Storage Server for filesharing. I was wondering if there is any product that will let me use three disks (~200GB/RAID5) as JBOD (SCSI-to-SCSI or SATAII-to-SCSI for clustering and the rest for NAS (WSS 2003). I would hate to get two different units (1 for clustering and 1 for filesharing).

The bottomline is our budget for this project is not big, but we have some critical apps that has to be available 24/7/365.

Your suggestions are greatly appreciated

 

[mrdenny]

For the web servers instead of going active/passive why not go active/active? This way you don't have to worry about failover on the web server, if one goes down it goes down.

For the SQL server cluster you will need to be careful as to what drive array you purchase. The supported hardware for clustering is very limited. Check the HCL (

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hcl/default.mspx).

If I was building this out I would use the two new machines as the SQL cluster, and the to slower machines as the web servers as web servers usually don't need high end machines.

This will give you the ability to run the SQL Server at full load no matter which server is active. In the event of a hardware failure this will give you more options.

You mentioned the worry about the software cost of buying Windows Enterprise for the web server. You will need Windows Enterprise for both SQL Servers, as well as SQL 2000 Enterprise (assuming that you are using SQL 2000). This is not a cheep piece of software.

You can use Windows NLB is all editions of Windows Server 2003 (

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/features/comparefeatures.mspx).

Denny
MCSA (2003) / MCDBA (SQL 2000) / MCTS (SQL 2005) / MCITP Database Administrator (SQL 2005)

--Anything is possible. All it takes is a little research. (Me)

http://www.mrdenny.com

 

[pie8ter]

Thanks Denny.

For IIS loadbalancing:

I wanted to go with Active\passive because this way I can update the passive server with new content, force the failover to passive, update the active server and transfer the load to active node. I am trying not to use file replication between both IIS servers. Besides, I am guessing NLB involves some kind of virtualization. If the server handling the virtualization goes down, both servers will be out of line. This is why I want to go with hardware based NLB. Am I right?

What do you think about HW laodbalancers? Can you recommend any brands in $3000 range? I am looking at loadmaster 1500 from kemp technologies.

For SQL clusters:

As you said, I am going to go with two new SQL servers for clusters. I am thinking of "HP ProLiant DL380 G4 Packaged Cluster with MSA500 G2" bundle. This way I don't have to worry about incombatible hardware and Microsoft support problems. What do you think about the HP cluster bundle?

We will be using SQL 2005. I know I need two windows 2003 EE licenses and one SQL 2005 standard. I am getting conflicting answers on how many SQL 2005 license and what version of SQL 2005 will be supported in clustering. I was told since I will be implementing active/passive nodes, I need to get only one sql 2005 license.

Thanks for your help.

 

[mrdenny]

With NLB both machines handle the load ballancing so either can go down and the virtual IP and name are still up.

If you went with active/active you could simply stop IIS on one machine, update it's content then bring it online and take the other down to update that one's content.

With a web server deployment you can usually do it while the system is live as the deployments are usually small.

Either method will work fine however.

Sorry, I don't know anything about hardware load ballancers.

That HP solution should work nicly for you.

You are correct you will need two Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition licenses. One for each host.

You will need one SQL 2005 license (you only have to license the active node). There are two basic license models for SQL 2005. CPU and named users / named devices. If this is an internet facing application you will need to use CPU licensing. If this is an internal only facing application then named users / named devices may work for you depending on the number of users you have. This FAQ should answer most of your questions faq962-5153.

Denny
MCSA (2003) / MCDBA (SQL 2000) / MCTS (SQL 2005) / MCITP Database Administrator (SQL 2005)

--Anything is possible. All it takes is a little research. (Me)

http://www.mrdenny.com

 

[pie8ter]

Where is the virtual IP and name are hosted? What if that server/device fails?