<div>
<div class="content wysiwyg-content">
I currently have an active passive cluster to support my SQL 2000 OLTP environment. In a recent test of the cluster's fail over (I simulated a server failure by unplugging the nic on the active node) the system dropped. I have 3 applications that rely on the database to function, they all failed. The cluster service died and then restarted changing over the passive node. &nbsp;I had to manually restart the applications to get back up and running. I spoke Dell (they setup the cluster) and they said that clustering wont provide what I am looking for. Can I get your thoughts on this? Will an active/active cluster provide this?
</div>
</div>


I currently have an active passive cluster to support my SQL 2000 OLTP environment. In a recent test of the cluster's fail over (I simulated a server failure by unplugging the nic on the active node) the system dropped. I have 3 applications that rely on the database to function, they all failed. The cluster service died and then restarted changing over the passive node.  I had to manually restart the applications to get back up and running. I spoke Dell (they setup the cluster) and they said that clustering wont provide what I am looking for. Can I get your thoughts on this? Will an active/active cluster provide this?

Active/Passive Clustering not high availability

Windows Server 2003 was based on Windows XP and was released in four editions: Web, Standard, Enterprise and Datacenter. It also had derivative versions for clusters, storage and Microsoft’s Small Business Server. Important upgrades included integrating Internet Information Services (IIS), improvements to Active Directory (AD) and Group Policy (GP), and the migration to Automated System Recovery (ASR).