Cheap solution for .Net/sql giving high availability?

Hi
I am looking into finding a cheap solution for a .Net/sql server web
app that gives high availability and hardware redundancy.
Given that performance isn't a great issue, I was wondering if the
following would work:
Two servers running Windows 2003 Standard and clustered using Network
Load Balancing (NLB). Each server running SQL 2005 Standard and
configured so that one server mirrors the other.
Would this configuration mean if either server failed the application
would keep working on the remaining server without any intervention? If
not what other options do I have? Having one active server with another
as a backup would also be fine but I assume this would require some
maintenance to switch the servers over when a failure occurs.
In terms of the actual servers I was looking at the Dell PowerEdge 860
Quad Core Intel Xeon X3210 2.13GHz as these would only need one sql
server licence per server. Storage using RAID 1 for more redundancy and
a UPS for short power outages. I know I could get cheaper servers but
the largest cost would be SQL server 2005 (approx 4100) so getting a
2 server solution would be Ideal.
Any more suggestions on setup or hardware would be appreciated.
Thanks
Henry
If you're using SQL Server 2005, why not investigate Failover Clustering or
Database Mirroring? Both are available on the standard edition (with
limitations compared to enterprise ed).
In what you described below, you have 2 physically independent databases
running (NLB doesn't mean anything to SQL Server). How would you keep them
both in sync? You mentioned configured so that they mirror each other, did
you mean using DB Mirroring or something else? This is not a trivial issue.
With homegrown solution you need to ensure you don't get into situations
where data is out of sync but your application/users are not aware of it.
HP has some nifty cluster-in-a-box solutions with the DL38x and DL58x
(beefier) platforms. They're relatively inexpensive. Haven't worked with
Dell hardware in some time but they probably have similar offerings also.
If you don't want to deal with Failover Clustering, you can get just the 2
servers and implement DB Mirroring.
In your case, I'd recommend DB Mirroring.
joe.
"Henry" <henry.nelson@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1169572502.397351.275050@.m58g2000cwm.googlegr oups.com...
Hi
I am looking into finding a cheap solution for a .Net/sql server web
app that gives high availability and hardware redundancy.
Given that performance isn't a great issue, I was wondering if the
following would work:
Two servers running Windows 2003 Standard and clustered using Network
Load Balancing (NLB). Each server running SQL 2005 Standard and
configured so that one server mirrors the other.
Would this configuration mean if either server failed the application
would keep working on the remaining server without any intervention? If
not what other options do I have? Having one active server with another
as a backup would also be fine but I assume this would require some
maintenance to switch the servers over when a failure occurs.
In terms of the actual servers I was looking at the Dell PowerEdge 860
Quad Core Intel Xeon X3210 2.13GHz as these would only need one sql
server licence per server. Storage using RAID 1 for more redundancy and
a UPS for short power outages. I know I could get cheaper servers but
the largest cost would be SQL server 2005 (approx 4100) so getting a
2 server solution would be Ideal.
Any more suggestions on setup or hardware would be appreciated.
Thanks
Henry