Home
About Us
Contact Us
Advertise
Facebook
Twitter
RSS Feed
Printable version
The Microsoft Stack: Windows Server 2008 Clustering Designed to Overcome Usability Barrier
By Patrick Hynds
August 1, 2008 —
(Page 1 of 3)
Reliability is important to all organizations, but in some cases it is life and death. Earlier this year I helped a health-care organization recover from an outage that had an entire hospital working without crucial data they would rather not lose access to while treating patients.
The offending system was a Windows 2003 Server cluster hosting SQL Server, as well as other services. I was called in not to fill a gap in technical depth, but because Microsoft clusters are a bit of a black art if you don’t deal with them regularly. We were able to recover the offending node and restore the corrupt shared registry in a very short time, but it highlighted the real barrier to why more organizations are not using Windows clusters more widely, and that is usability.
Cluster servers started with a product years ago that was code named Wolf Pack, a very World War II-style code name, and has evolved to be quite powerful but not terribly easy to use. The good news is that ease of use is a major goal with the new version of clustering soon to be available in Windows Server 2008.
Before I dive into the promised improvements, let’s review the concepts behind Windows Clustering, starting with the quorum drive. To do this, let's think of two people working to ensure a critically ill patient receives a high level of care for 24 hours. The key element to ensure the continuity of care is that both caregivers share a common knowledge of the situation at any given moment and also that they know who is actually supposed to be in charge at any given time, to avoid such potentially deadly events as giving overdoses of medicines.
The quorum drive provides the storage location that both nodes share (by turn), so that when one fails, the other can pick up where things left off. There are also shared resources that fail back and forth as the active node changes. For this reason, any stateful objects like files or logs are stored in a place that the active node can assert control over and pick up where the failed node left off.
Next Page
Related Search Term(s):
clustering
,
Windows Server
,
Microsoft
Pages
1
2
3
Share this link:
http://www.sysmannews.com/link/32626
Related Articles
Windows Essential Server Solutions Slated for Fall
Windows Small Business Server 2008 and Windows Essential Business Server 2008 have reached the Release Candidate 1 milestone, and they will launch on Nov. 12 of this year.
Exchange Server 2007 Migration: Look Before You Leap
Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 is a viable update to its predecessors, but businesses are reluctant to migrate to it, fearing loss of data and increased complexity. Here's how they can navigate that migration without hitting any major snags.
Live From Microsoft Tech·Ed IT Professionals—Wednesday, June 11
The second day of TechEd featured sessions covering best practices for Microsoft SQL Server 2008, implementing virtualization using Microsoft IT and the drive for 64-bit computing. Bamboo Solutions and NetApp announced new products.
Add comment
Name*
Email*
Country
United States
Canada
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
American Samoa
Andorra
Angola
Anguilla
Antarctica
Antigua & Barbuda
Antilles, Netherlands
Arabia, Saudi
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas, The
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bermuda
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
British Virgin Islands
Brunei Darussalam
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Cayman Islands
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Christmas Island
Cocos (Keeling) Islands
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Cook Islands
Costa Rica
Cote D'Ivoire
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
East Timor (Timor-Leste)
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Falkland Islands (Malvinas)
Faroe Islands
Fiji
Finland
France
French Guiana
French Polynesia
Gabon
Gambia, the
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Gibraltar
Greece
Greenland
Grenada
Guadeloupe
Guam
Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guinea, Equatorial
Guyana
Haiti
Holland (see Netherlands)
Honduras
Hong Kong, (China)
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Republic of
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Korea (North)
Korea (South)
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macao, (China)
Macedonia, TFYR
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Martinique
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mayotte
Mexico
Micronesia, Federated States of
Moldova, Republic of
Monaco
Mongolia
Montenegro
Montserrat
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar (ex-Burma)
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
Netherlands Antilles
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
Niue
Norfolk Island
Northern Mariana Islands
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Palestinian Territory
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Reunion
Romania
Russia (Russian Federation)
Rwanda
Saint Helena
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia & Montenegro
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka (ex-Ceilan)
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syrian Arab Republic
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania, United Republic of
Thailand
Timor-Leste (East Timor)
Togo
Tokelau
Tonga
Trinidad & Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Turks and Caicos Islands
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Vatican City State (Holy See)
Venezuela
VietNam
Virgin Islands, British
Virgin Islands, U.S.
Wallis and Futuna
Western Sahara
Yemen
Zambia
Zanzibar
Zimbabwe
[Not specified]
Comment
Preview