Want to protect your cyber security and still get fast solutions? Ask a secure question today.Go Premium

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 447
  • Last Modified:

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

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
Senior IT System Engineer
Asked:
Senior IT System Engineer
  • 3
  • 2
2 Solutions
 
Simon Butler (Sembee)ConsultantCommented:
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
 
Senior IT System EngineerIT ProfessionalAuthor Commented:
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
 
Simon Butler (Sembee)ConsultantCommented:
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
 
Senior IT System EngineerIT ProfessionalAuthor Commented:
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
 
Senior IT System EngineerIT ProfessionalAuthor Commented:
THanks !
0

Featured Post

Get your problem seen by more experts

Be seen. Boost your question’s priority for more expert views and faster solutions

  • 3
  • 2
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now