kam_uk
asked on
Quorum as a cluster resource
Hi
We are running Exchange 2003 and Exchange 2007.
Our Exchange 2003 servers are all Active/Active/Passive clusters running Windows 2003.
Our Exchange 2007 servers are SCC Active/Passive running Windows 2008.
With 2003, there is a cluster namednamed CLUSTER RESOURCE that contains the Quorom etc plus another cluster group containing the Exchange specific resources With Exchange 2007, the only cluster resource is the CMS.
Does anyone know if there is an actual reason for this (difference in number of nodes, difference in OS etc), or should we have added another Cluster Resource when we built the 2007 servers for the Quorum?
We are running Exchange 2003 and Exchange 2007.
Our Exchange 2003 servers are all Active/Active/Passive clusters running Windows 2003.
Our Exchange 2007 servers are SCC Active/Passive running Windows 2008.
With 2003, there is a cluster namednamed CLUSTER RESOURCE that contains the Quorom etc plus another cluster group containing the Exchange specific resources With Exchange 2007, the only cluster resource is the CMS.
Does anyone know if there is an actual reason for this (difference in number of nodes, difference in OS etc), or should we have added another Cluster Resource when we built the 2007 servers for the Quorum?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
again in exchange 2007 the cluster is configured by Exchange and not manually before installing exchange like in exchange 2003. Yes if you type cluster group you will see a Available Storage, Cluster Group, and Cluster Name but you don't need to worry about them
Finally, you say that we should use the EMC/EMS to move the CMS. What would be the drawback of using the Failover Cluster Management? Are there any specific examples out of interest?
If you move the cluster from the cluster management it is, for exchange, as if you had a failure it will not cleanly hand over to the other node but it will be as if one node failed
Finally, you say that we should use the EMC/EMS to move the CMS. What would be the drawback of using the Failover Cluster Management? Are there any specific examples out of interest?
If you move the cluster from the cluster management it is, for exchange, as if you had a failure it will not cleanly hand over to the other node but it will be as if one node failed
Cluster group
Lists the cluster groups, it doesn't make it visible in the Cluster GUI. Yes, you can move the cluster groups with "cluster group <group name> /move".
/move is fine to use for "Available Storage" and the "Cluster Group", but do not use it to move the Exchange cluster because it can kill CCR / SCC and you may have to Reseed all your CCR databases... It's a BIG no-no from Microsoft, use EMC or EMS to move the Exchange cluster properly.
Lists the cluster groups, it doesn't make it visible in the Cluster GUI. Yes, you can move the cluster groups with "cluster group <group name> /move".
/move is fine to use for "Available Storage" and the "Cluster Group", but do not use it to move the Exchange cluster because it can kill CCR / SCC and you may have to Reseed all your CCR databases... It's a BIG no-no from Microsoft, use EMC or EMS to move the Exchange cluster properly.
ASKER
To confirm, in 2003 I can see a Cluster Group containing Cluster IP address, Cluster Name, etc. I can move this group between nodes.
I can't see this on the 2007 box, you are saying that by typing "Cluster group" at a command prompt will allow me to see it and move the group between nodes as well? Is there any negative aspect/disadvantage to running this command? Will it allow EVERYONE that logs onto the server to see the Cluster resources?
Secondly, I can see in the Cluster set up that there is a preferred owner to the CMS, what does this actually mean?
Finally, you say that we should use the EMC/EMS to move the CMS. What would be the drawback of using the Failover Cluster Management? Are there any specific examples out of interest?