Quantcast
Channel: SQL Server High Availability and Disaster Recovery forum
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 4689

Listener name for conneting primary replica and other queries

$
0
0

Hi Team,

I am planning to have below setup, and need some inputs related to AG listeners.

In Primary datacenter:

2 node WSFC with multiple SQL instances, each running on static port (not on 1433).

Shared storage between Node 1 and Node 2

In DR site:

Extend the Primary WSFC and add 1 more node to the existing cluster. This node will be a SQL standalone with SQL multiple instances (no. of instances will be same as of primary SQL FCI). Each instance will have instance name with static port (other than 1433)

Will have dedicate\independent storage (LUN/vdisk). No storage replication between sites

AG:

create Availability groups for SQL Dbs. Node 1 and node 2 will be primary replica

Node 3 standalone will be Secondary replica

Listener groups will be created for each AG and will have unique VNN with port as 1433.

Queries:

1. I understand such setup will not provide automatic failover but need to point client/application manually to secondary replica. Is there anyway to achieve automatic connections if primary datacenter is down?

2. Is it possible to create blank availability groups (with no DBs)?

3. If it is possible to have availability groups and listeners created before DBs are created, is it possible to give VNN name\listener name while installing application and its DB need to created instead of SQL Cluster name\Instance name? Not sure but if its possible, will it provide automatic failover to applications in case primary Datacenter is down and still connect to DB available in DR as part of AG replication?

4. There is another scenario wherein instead of above setup, we can have 3 individual node running independent storage and multiple SQL instances on different boxes. Does that also require WSFC ? and can provide HA?

5. Individual setup running there own storage with primary , secondary , secondary replica is much more better that 2 node cluster and then standalone in DR? Any pros and cons for both the approaches. One thing i can see is more storage is required with 3 individual nodes since each will have its own DB copy.

6. Any document that can list the network requirements (heartbeat, public, AG NIC, IP addresses for each node etc.) if we plan to have 2 node SQL FCI with 1 node standalone in DR by extending WSFC?

Any inputs will be highly appreciated  

Regards,


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 4689

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>