0

I have two named SQL Server 2012 Standalone Instances on each server. I would like to know what the best way to set up Always On .

INST1(Principal) on SERVER1 --> Replica on INST2

INST2(Principal) on SERVER2 --> Replica on INST1

OR

INST1(Principal) on SERVER1 --> Replica on INST2

INST2(Principal) on SERVER1 --> Replica on INST2

Thank you very much for your time and I really appreciate it!!!

2
  • i'm going to need a lot more information that this. please provide the actual instance names (is an instance actually named SERVER1\INST1).
    – swasheck
    Aug 10, 2016 at 18:16
  • @swasheck, example: Server1 instance name: SQL01 Server2 instance name: SQL02
    – Keny
    Aug 10, 2016 at 18:51

2 Answers 2

1

It doesn't really matter which one you pick. If it were my servers though, I would use the same instance names on each server. So INST1 would appear on SERVER1 and SERVER2, and then you'd AG INST1 with INST1.

But I don't like stacking instances on a server as it makes it hard to troubleshoot and do maintenance. If these are virtual machines, setup another virtual machine to host the other instance, or in your case setup two more virtual machines.

10
  • hard to tell, but it seems like these may be two different servers, each with a named instance? i dunno.
    – swasheck
    Aug 10, 2016 at 18:16
  • @swasheck, yes that's what I assumed too. I think there's 2 servers that each have 2 instances.
    – Tara Kizer
    Aug 10, 2016 at 18:17
  • @Tara, I think the first example is the best. As you mentioned virtual machines, do you have some tip or suggestion to Always On running on vmware? Thank you.
    – Keny
    Aug 10, 2016 at 18:39
  • @swasheck, I have two server and each server have just one instance.
    – Keny
    Aug 10, 2016 at 18:39
  • 1
    @Keny, I am not understanding your question then. If you only have one instance on each server, what are you asking? Are you asking about the naming convention of the two instances? If so, I'd name them the same if it were my servers. Actually I'd use default instances and not named instances.
    – Tara Kizer
    Aug 10, 2016 at 18:48
0

I think this depends on where things are.

Is your set up like this?

SERVER1\INST1 SERVER2\INST1

SERVER1\INST2 SERVER2\INST2

If the above is how you have things setup, then from a DR standpoint, I would set it up to be as follows.

PRIMARY REPLICA SERVER1\INST1 -> SERVER2\INST1

and

PRIMARY REPLICA SERVER1\INST2 -> SERVER2\INST2

This assumes that SERVER1 and SERVER2 are on separate hardware, and hopefully separate data centers. If this is the setup, then this would give you a setup that is easy to follow and document.

Now, I agree with some of the comments that have been posted. If these are virtual, there is not a reason to stack instances. Each instance should be its own VM. This simplifies your AG setup, your server provisioning, your troubleshooting, and your life.

One big thing you should check with your licensing on is IF you can not pay for your secondary replica. In most Microsoft agreements, if the secondary server is for DR purposes only, then you can have it setup and not pay for the licensing of that node. This lends to the set up I outlined above, keep everything on SERVER1.

1
  • Actually i have two servers and each server have just one instance, but each instance has its own databases that need to be replicas.
    – Keny
    Aug 10, 2016 at 20:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.