Mixing 32-bit and 64-bit in MSSQL Cluster

Hi,
We currently have 2 32-bit machines in an MS Cluster with MSSQL as a
Resource.
And these machines can only hold 6 Gb of memory which is not enough
anymore.
I was wondering if I could add 1 new 64-bit machine in this cluster or
that need to create a new cluster with 2 new 64-bit machines.
Regards,
Sven Peeters
Hi,
You can not mix 32-bit and 64-bit nodes on the same Windows Cluster. So, you
will need to create a new 64-bit Windows Cluster.
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
"Icemokka" wrote:

> Hi,
> We currently have 2 32-bit machines in an MS Cluster with MSSQL as a
> Resource.
> And these machines can only hold 6 Gb of memory which is not enough
> anymore.
> I was wondering if I could add 1 new 64-bit machine in this cluster or
> that need to create a new cluster with 2 new 64-bit machines.
> Regards,
> Sven Peeters
>
|||Hi,
You can not mix 32-bit and 64-bit nodes on the same Windows Cluster. So, you
will need to create a new 64-bit Windows Cluster.
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
"Icemokka" wrote:

> Hi,
> We currently have 2 32-bit machines in an MS Cluster with MSSQL as a
> Resource.
> And these machines can only hold 6 Gb of memory which is not enough
> anymore.
> I was wondering if I could add 1 new 64-bit machine in this cluster or
> that need to create a new cluster with 2 new 64-bit machines.
> Regards,
> Sven Peeters
>
|||On 10 feb, 11:26, Ben Nevarez <bneva...@.no.spam.please.sunamerica.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
> You can not mix 32-bit and 64-bit nodes on the same Windows Cluster. So, you
> will need to create a new 64-bit Windows Cluster.
> Hope this helps,
> Ben Nevarez
>
> "Icemokka" wrote:
>
> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
Thank you ...

Mixing 32-bit and 64-bit in MSSQL Cluster

Hi,
We currently have 2 32-bit machines in an MS Cluster with MSSQL as a
Resource.
And these machines can only hold 6 Gb of memory which is not enough
anymore.
I was wondering if I could add 1 new 64-bit machine in this cluster or
that need to create a new cluster with 2 new 64-bit machines.
Regards,
Sven PeetersHi,
You can not mix 32-bit and 64-bit nodes on the same Windows Cluster. So, you
will need to create a new 64-bit Windows Cluster.
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
"Icemokka" wrote:
> Hi,
> We currently have 2 32-bit machines in an MS Cluster with MSSQL as a
> Resource.
> And these machines can only hold 6 Gb of memory which is not enough
> anymore.
> I was wondering if I could add 1 new 64-bit machine in this cluster or
> that need to create a new cluster with 2 new 64-bit machines.
> Regards,
> Sven Peeters
>|||Hi,
You can not mix 32-bit and 64-bit nodes on the same Windows Cluster. So, you
will need to create a new 64-bit Windows Cluster.
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
"Icemokka" wrote:
> Hi,
> We currently have 2 32-bit machines in an MS Cluster with MSSQL as a
> Resource.
> And these machines can only hold 6 Gb of memory which is not enough
> anymore.
> I was wondering if I could add 1 new 64-bit machine in this cluster or
> that need to create a new cluster with 2 new 64-bit machines.
> Regards,
> Sven Peeters
>|||On 10 feb, 11:26, Ben Nevarez <bneva...@.no.spam.please.sunamerica.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
> You can not mix 32-bit and 64-bit nodes on the same Windows Cluster. So, you
> will need to create a new 64-bit Windows Cluster.
> Hope this helps,
> Ben Nevarez
>
> "Icemokka" wrote:
> > Hi,
> > We currently have 2 32-bit machines in an MS Cluster with MSSQL as a
> > Resource.
> > And these machines can only hold 6 Gb of memory which is not enough
> > anymore.
> > I was wondering if I could add 1 new 64-bit machine in this cluster or
> > that need to create a new cluster with 2 new 64-bit machines.
> > Regards,
> > Sven Peeters- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
Thank you ...sql

missing records on subscribing database (transactional replication)

Hi all,
I have a publishing database and a subscriber database on two
different machines. Transactional replication is configured between
them. Everything is straigforward at the start, then after a few days
I got reports that the same tables on both databases are not in synch,
and some tables in the subscriber database has missing rows.
Has anyone experienced this? I realize that it is possible to delete
rows on the subscriber database, but other than that, is it possible
for the transactional replication to actually fail to copy some rows
from the publishing database?
There are no filters set, btw.
Thanks!
Aramid
If you don't have any errors in the replication engine, then, no it will not
fail to send changes. You would have to interfere with it in some way such
as within the distribution database. I would suggest doing some auditing at
your subscriber and see if there is a process which is making changes there.
Mike
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com
Disclaimer: This communication is an original work and represents my sole
views on the subject. It does not represent the views of any other person
or entity either by inference or direct reference.
"Aramid" <aramid@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8fueu1to6vadlh5dd4q1be9509cteqnbdk@.4ax.com...
> Hi all,
> I have a publishing database and a subscriber database on two
> different machines. Transactional replication is configured between
> them. Everything is straigforward at the start, then after a few days
> I got reports that the same tables on both databases are not in synch,
> and some tables in the subscriber database has missing rows.
> Has anyone experienced this? I realize that it is possible to delete
> rows on the subscriber database, but other than that, is it possible
> for the transactional replication to actually fail to copy some rows
> from the publishing database?
> There are no filters set, btw.
> Thanks!
> Aramid
|||Aramid,
these are 2 separate possibilities that you're describing. In one, the rows
are deleted from the subscriber, while in the other, some inserts are not
sent from the publisher to the subscriber. For the first, this is unlikely
to occur through the replication engine, so I'd go along with Mike's
suggestion and use Lumigent's LogExplorer to investigate. This is also
possible to occur naturally through the replication, if you are replicating
stored procedure execution. In the other case, I'd use sp_browsereplcmds to
see if the commands are still waiting to be sent down.
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)

missing hd partition

hello, we have sqlserver2K on Win2K SP4 on two machines namely prod and
backup. on backup when i do EM backup and click on the "add" device i
could view the different hard disk partitions of my server (C:, D:, E:,
F. but on the prod i could only view C: even though there is a D:
partition. previously i had scheduled an EM backup to D: partition on
this prod server. last week i noticed that the backup is failing
because D: is not being "seen" by EM. i've read through the BOL but
couldn't find a clue (probably i'm thick) so i'm asking if anyone could
shed a light on how EM "see" the D: partition?maverick wrote:
> hello, we have sqlserver2K on Win2K SP4 on two machines namely prod and
> backup. on backup when i do EM backup and click on the "add" device i
> could view the different hard disk partitions of my server (C:, D:, E:,
> F. but on the prod i could only view C: even though there is a D:
> partition. previously i had scheduled an EM backup to D: partition on
> this prod server. last week i noticed that the backup is failing
> because D: is not being "seen" by EM. i've read through the BOL but
> couldn't find a clue (probably i'm thick) so i'm asking if anyone could
> shed a light on how EM "see" the D: partition?
>
Verify that the SQL Server service account (check the service
properties) has permissions to read/write on the "missing" partition.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Tracy McKibben wrote:
> Verify that the SQL Server service account (check the service
> properties) has permissions to read/write on the "missing" partition.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
that worked! the account that sqlserver is using doesn't have
permissions on the "missing" partition.
thank you so much Tracy for your help!

missing hd partition

hello, we have sqlserver2K on Win2K SP4 on two machines namely prod and
backup. on backup when i do EM backup and click on the "add" device i
could view the different hard disk partitions of my server (C:, D:, E:,
F:). but on the prod i could only view C: even though there is a D:
partition. previously i had scheduled an EM backup to D: partition on
this prod server. last week i noticed that the backup is failing
because D: is not being "seen" by EM. i've read through the BOL but
couldn't find a clue (probably i'm thick) so i'm asking if anyone could
shed a light on how EM "see" the D: partition?maverick wrote:
> hello, we have sqlserver2K on Win2K SP4 on two machines namely prod and
> backup. on backup when i do EM backup and click on the "add" device i
> could view the different hard disk partitions of my server (C:, D:, E:,
> F:). but on the prod i could only view C: even though there is a D:
> partition. previously i had scheduled an EM backup to D: partition on
> this prod server. last week i noticed that the backup is failing
> because D: is not being "seen" by EM. i've read through the BOL but
> couldn't find a clue (probably i'm thick) so i'm asking if anyone could
> shed a light on how EM "see" the D: partition?
>
Verify that the SQL Server service account (check the service
properties) has permissions to read/write on the "missing" partition.
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Tracy McKibben wrote:
> Verify that the SQL Server service account (check the service
> properties) has permissions to read/write on the "missing" partition.
>
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
that worked! the account that sqlserver is using doesn't have
permissions on the "missing" partition.
thank you so much Tracy for your help!