4 SQL instances in Cluster on 2 windows server

Is it possible to have 4 SQL instances in Cluster on 2 windows server.
Active/passive set-up.
In detail, what i mean is:
I have 2 windows OS - WinClustA with WinClustB
On WinClustA - SQLInstA (active) and SQLInstY (passive)
On WinClustB - SQLInstB (passive) and SQLInstX (active)
In case of failure,
SQLInstA will failover to SQLInstB and
SQLInstX will failover to SQLInstY
Is this possible to configure?
You have a misunderstanding of how clustering works. What you want is 2 SQL
instances: SQLInstA and SQLInstB. With SQL clustering, each instance can
run on any host node, but only on one node at a time. Normally you will
have SQLInstA running on WinClustA and SQLInstB on WinClustB. Should either
node fail, the other node runs both instances. That is how clustering works
and yes, it is possible.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Pari" <Pari@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E4D2C97A-8B60-4E64-A5E3-37215C1456FE@.microsoft.com...
> Is it possible to have 4 SQL instances in Cluster on 2 windows server.
> Active/passive set-up.
> In detail, what i mean is:
> I have 2 windows OS - WinClustA with WinClustB
> On WinClustA - SQLInstA (active) and SQLInstY (passive)
> On WinClustB - SQLInstB (passive) and SQLInstX (active)
> In case of failure,
> SQLInstA will failover to SQLInstB and
> SQLInstX will failover to SQLInstY
> Is this possible to configure?
>
|||While my SQLInstB instance is passive on windows machine WinclustB, I do not
want to waste the resource on winClustB, I want to install another instance
called SQLInstX (active), and host another set of databases from this
instance.
Hence each WinclustA and WinclustB I will have one active SQL Instance and
one passive SQL Instance.
I have not worked with clustering too much, so please inform if this is
possible. I did read all the content in SQL BOL fro clustering.
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> You have a misunderstanding of how clustering works. What you want is 2 SQL
> instances: SQLInstA and SQLInstB. With SQL clustering, each instance can
> run on any host node, but only on one node at a time. Normally you will
> have SQLInstA running on WinClustA and SQLInstB on WinClustB. Should either
> node fail, the other node runs both instances. That is how clustering works
> and yes, it is possible.
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Pari" <Pari@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E4D2C97A-8B60-4E64-A5E3-37215C1456FE@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||Active and Passive are obsolete terms used to describe SQL 7.0 clustering.
They do not apply to SQL 2000 clustering. Even then, "Active" and "Passive"
referred to host nodes, not instances. An clustered instance of SQL Server
2000 does not have any "active" or "passive" context. It is an instance,
period.
You want two SQL instances which will each run on separate nodes (host
computers) except during failure. That is what I described to you under SQL
2000 clustering. Node A runs one instance and Node B runs another instance.
Should one node fail, the other node starts running both instances of SQL
server. There is no "passive" instance anywhere. The "Active" instance
simply changes host nodes. Again, this is possible. You can have up to 4
host nodes and 16 SQL instances in a SQL 2000 cluster. You can choose the
normal host node and the failure path of each SQL instance separately.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Pari" <Pari@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EF0D86F1-EEBF-48F7-A92A-CAFE5531DB05@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> While my SQLInstB instance is passive on windows machine WinclustB, I do
> not
> want to waste the resource on winClustB, I want to install another
> instance
> called SQLInstX (active), and host another set of databases from this
> instance.
> Hence each WinclustA and WinclustB I will have one active SQL Instance and
> one passive SQL Instance.
> I have not worked with clustering too much, so please inform if this is
> possible. I did read all the content in SQL BOL fro clustering.
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||This may help also:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;260758
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Pari" <Pari@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EF0D86F1-EEBF-48F7-A92A-CAFE5531DB05@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> While my SQLInstB instance is passive on windows machine WinclustB, I do
> not
> want to waste the resource on winClustB, I want to install another
> instance
> called SQLInstX (active), and host another set of databases from this
> instance.
> Hence each WinclustA and WinclustB I will have one active SQL Instance and
> one passive SQL Instance.
> I have not worked with clustering too much, so please inform if this is
> possible. I did read all the content in SQL BOL fro clustering.
>
> "Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:
|||This clarifies it, thanks.
"Geoff N. Hiten" wrote:

> Active and Passive are obsolete terms used to describe SQL 7.0 clustering.
> They do not apply to SQL 2000 clustering. Even then, "Active" and "Passive"
> referred to host nodes, not instances. An clustered instance of SQL Server
> 2000 does not have any "active" or "passive" context. It is an instance,
> period.
> You want two SQL instances which will each run on separate nodes (host
> computers) except during failure. That is what I described to you under SQL
> 2000 clustering. Node A runs one instance and Node B runs another instance.
> Should one node fail, the other node starts running both instances of SQL
> server. There is no "passive" instance anywhere. The "Active" instance
> simply changes host nodes. Again, this is possible. You can have up to 4
> host nodes and 16 SQL instances in a SQL 2000 cluster. You can choose the
> normal host node and the failure path of each SQL instance separately.
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Pari" <Pari@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:EF0D86F1-EEBF-48F7-A92A-CAFE5531DB05@.microsoft.com...
>
>