question

I suggest you take a look at best practices and whitepapers on the topic of SQL Server Clustering: - [Whitepaper from SQL CAT][1] - [Best Practice Document from MS (docx)][2] If you are looking at DR, what are your requirements? Clustering is more in the direction of High Availability (in my opinion). Have you considered Database Mirroring, Log Shipping or Replication for the DR site? These may be cheaper and easier to implement as you would not necessarily need the higher hardware requirements that come with clustering (especially geo-clustering). If you are just planning on keeping hot/warm standby versions of your databases, then database mirroring could be a very viable and affordable option. Take a look at this: - [Database Mirroring Best Practices (SQLCAT)][3] [1]: http://sqlcat.com/whitepapers/archive/2009/07/08/sql-server-2008-failover-clustering.aspx [2]: http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/9/D/69D1FEA7-5B42-437A-B3BA-A4AD13E34EF6/SQLServer2008FailoverCluster.docx [3]: http://sqlcat.com/whitepapers/archive/2007/11/19/database-mirroring-best-practices-and-performance-considerations.aspx

+1 to WilliamD, but I will provide some specific answers: > Main site for prod databases. - Would that have to be active passive ? Yes, it would. However, Active-Passive refers to a cluster group. I.e. only one side of the cluster group can be active at any one time. There is nothing stopping you from running two cluster groups, each of which are naturally active on different cluster nodes. When people talk about Active-Active with SQL Server, that's typically what they mean. However, for this to work you need separate SQL Server instances. > Does SQL 2008 standard support this 3 node model ? SQL Server doesn't really care. It cares about O/S support and the fact that shared storage is available. It is possible to have three nodes in a cluster, but, as WilliamD says, this might not be your best option for Geographic DR. > Have I got the config correct for the Cluster ? That's not really answerable. You would need to provide a lot more information about what your requirements were. > Any major gotcha's to be aware of in the planning phase ? Licensing. Be very careful when you look at it, because the licensing for SQL Server is complicated. I mean, it's nowhere near as bad as Oracle (which, frankly, makes you want to stick sharp pencils up your nose), but you do need to read the documentation on licensing carefully, and make sure that you are referring to the up-to-date document. > What is minimum I am looking at for the SAN config, so I can go back to network team to confirm my requirements are in place ? That depends entirely on your requirements. A 1MB database will do fine on any SAN, with a 10TB database - you need to look at it more carefully. A good place to start is [Brent Ozar's blog][1]. [1]: http://www.brentozar.com

Think about your underlying clustering technology too - are you tied to Microsoft Clustering or can you look at running Veritas Clusters? There are, as always, pros and cons to both. For example, the MS clustering will keep the nodes in sync (ie service packs etc), but only for the software it knows of as being "cluster-aware"; VCS cluster will allow you to cluster *any* service, but you'll have more work to do keeping the software levels on the nodes in sync.. EDIT: "other clustering technologies exist." *ahem*