|
Looking for some advice: Any issues running SQL Server 2008 STD x64 on a standard active passive windows server r2 x64 cluster along side a DB2 install on same cluster? Apart from performance.
(comments are locked)
|
|
Why shouldn't it work? As far as clustering is concerned, they are cluster services which will then be failed over as normal if needed/wanted. As you say, performance could be an issue, but you'll be looking at splitting the resources as necessary so as long as that is ok that should be fine. I don't have Win 2k8r2 for my cluster, but 2k8 has been rock solid from day one. I cannot see there being any issues there. Are you adding both to a new cluster, or adding SQL Server to a current DB2 cluster? To be honest I don't really know - I was asked the question by a friend who thinks I know something about databases - so I thought I would throw it out here. My gut feel is that if there is enough resources (cpu/disk/ram) for both, and they can be configured not to clash, then it's a suck-it-and-see approach!
Jan 13 '11 at 04:57 AM
Kev Riley ♦♦
I think so too - it is similar to running SQL and Exchange on the same box (I think that cluster or not is irrelevant really). It can be done, you just have to be careful. They just have to be aware that the resources are going to be crunched by both in a way they/their cluster/san admins may not expect. I wouldn't recommend it though - troubleshooting any issues is going to cause a lot of finger pointing / energetic gesturing, unless both systems and the underlying hardware have bloody good metrics and baselines.
Jan 13 '11 at 05:06 AM
WilliamD
(comments are locked)
|
