Alternatives to failover clustering for high availability
Posted on 2005-04-14
I developed an INTRANET app. (ASP NET) using visual basic.net, and SQL server. Please note that I am using as client the Internet explorer so I don't keep connections to the database
I have no experience with clustered servers. I need almost 100% availability so I want to have a redundant configuration like this:
2 clustered servers Active-Passive. with external RAID disks for the data.
But the vendor says I need at least 2 W2k3 Enterprise and one SQL Server Enterprise + CAL ( lot of $ for a very small company)
To achieve high availability, are there alternatives to the Enterprise solution? (No Microsoft OS and or DB is out of the question, it is too late)
For instance licensing two standard sql server and two standard W2k3 and use replication? Or
if I choose to have W2K3 Enterprise and the two standard SQL, could I use the MSCS (Cluster Server) somehow to have the second server up when the first fails?
My boss is not very happy about having to pay a lot more to Microsoft for a second server that will not be normally used. Please help, or confirm the bad news.
(almost, above, means downtimes of no more than half an hour in a year)