Solved

Patching Exchange Server 2007 from the active node and to the passive node

Posted on 2013-05-19
5
438 Views
Last Modified: 2013-05-20
Hi People,

What is the catch or the caveats apart from the few minutes of downtime for the Outlook user if I do the patching for the following clustered Exchange Server box:

Unicast NLB cluster Hub Transport
Start with the Node 1 and then followed by Node 2

Cluster Continuous Replication Mailbox Server
Start with the ACTIVE Node 1 so that after the patching the MBX role is fail over to PASSIVE Node 2

and then the current ACTIVE Node 2 patched to bring the MBX role failed over to PASSIVE Node 1

I know that it is rather weird or unorthodox way to patch it but I try to avoid manually patching the Exchange Server and minimize the amount of downtime (twice  if I start the patching from the passive node to active node).
0
Comment
  • 3
  • 2
5 Comments
 
LVL 63

Assisted Solution

by:Simon Butler (Sembee)
Simon Butler (Sembee) earned 500 total points
ID: 39179316
You are going against best practises and I don't even think it will work.
As soon as you start patching you will cause the active node to failover.

To ensure that you don't have problems with your cluster, follow the guidance - patch the passive node, failover, patch the other one.

Simon.
0
 
LVL 7

Author Comment

by:Senior IT System Engineer
ID: 39179963
Yes I know but when you automate the patching using the patch deployment tool, from the passive node to the active node, then you'll have to do twice failover at least.
0
 
LVL 63

Accepted Solution

by:
Simon Butler (Sembee) earned 500 total points
ID: 39180344
That is going to happen anyway. You cannot avoid doing a failover at least twice unless you don't move the databases back to the previously primary server. If the cluster is working fine then you can do that. I regularly do that with one of my clients with a large CCR deployment.

The platform runs on active on server 1 until the next patching window, goes over to server 2, runs on that server until the next window, then goes back.

Means the client is confident that both nodes are able to do the job.

Simon.
0
 
LVL 7

Author Comment

by:Senior IT System Engineer
ID: 39180382
Yes but the reason I must failover back to the node 1 or the primary node is that the secondary node 2 is off site and the backup take place on the passive node not on the active nod(I'm using EMC Avamar).
0
 
LVL 7

Author Closing Comment

by:Senior IT System Engineer
ID: 39183022
THanks !
0

Featured Post

Free Webinar: AWS Backup & DR

Join our upcoming webinar with experts from AWS, CloudBerry Lab, and the Town of Edgartown IT to discuss best practices for simplifying online backup management and cutting costs.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Background Information Recently I have fixed file server permission issues for one of my client. The client has 1800 users and one Windows Server 2008 R2 domain joined file server with 12 TB of data, 250+ shared folders and the folder structure i…
This article aims to explain the working of CircularLogArchiver. This tool was designed to solve the buildup of log file in cases where systems do not support circular logging or where circular logging is not enabled
This tutorial will walk an individual through the process of transferring the five major, necessary Active Directory Roles, commonly referred to as the FSMO roles from a Windows Server 2008 domain controller to a Windows Server 2012 domain controlle…
This video shows how to use Hyena, from SystemTools Software, to bulk import 100 user accounts from an external text file. View in 1080p for best video quality.

749 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question