64bit windows and 32bit SQL

I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
memory?
I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
to access all the memory. Any ideas?SQL 2000 Standard is limited to 2GB RAM.
--
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Marc Speed" <vw_marc@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:egONT2E$GHA.1220@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
>Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
>upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
> Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
> 64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
> memory?
> I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
> to access all the memory. Any ideas?
>
>|||> I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors.
Throwing more memory at the problem is probably not the solution. Have you
installed SP4? Do you get the error with only certain types of queries?
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Marc Speed" <vw_marc@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:egONT2E$GHA.1220@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
>Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
>upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
> Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
> 64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
> memory?
> I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
> to access all the memory. Any ideas?
>
>

64bit windows and 32bit SQL

I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
memory?
I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
to access all the memory. Any ideas?SQL 2000 Standard is limited to 2GB RAM.
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Marc Speed" <vw_marc@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:egONT2E$GHA.1220@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
>Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
>upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
> Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
> 64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
> memory?
> I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
> to access all the memory. Any ideas?
>
>|||> I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors.
Throwing more memory at the problem is probably not the solution. Have you
installed SP4? Do you get the error with only certain types of queries?
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Marc Speed" <vw_marc@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:egONT2E$GHA.1220@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I have a 64bit Windows Server machine running a 32bit version of SQL 2000
>Standard. I am running into 'insufficient memory available' errors. I
>upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB, but the problem persists.
> Do I need to use the /PAE or /3GB boot switch even though I am running a
> 64bit version of Windows? Do I need AWE setup for SQL to access more
> memory?
> I figure this has more to do with the 32 bit version of SQL not being able
> to access all the memory. Any ideas?
>
>

64bit vs 32bit

If I create a database on 64bit version of SQL 2005 and then copy it to a
32bit version SQL 2005 will that database still work? and/or will
adminstrators have to make setting changes?All Editions of SQL within a major version maintain user database on-disk
compatibility across all architectures. That is a very complex way of
saying that any database created on any version/edition/processor
combination of SQL 2005 can be restored or copied to a SQL instance on any
other version/edition/processor combination. The sole exception is that SQL
Express will not accept a database over its 4GB size limit.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Sean" <Sean@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C85E4CF8-BA5D-4300-898F-49650A72627C@.microsoft.com...
> If I create a database on 64bit version of SQL 2005 and then copy it to a
> 32bit version SQL 2005 will that database still work? and/or will
> adminstrators have to make setting changes?|||In other words "yes it will work, all other things being equal".
;)
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Geoff N. Hiten wrote:

>All Editions of SQL within a major version maintain user database on-disk
>compatibility across all architectures. That is a very complex way of
>saying that any database created on any version/edition/processor
>combination of SQL 2005 can be restored or copied to a SQL instance on any
>other version/edition/processor combination. The sole exception is that SQ
L
>Express will not accept a database over its 4GB size limit.
>
>

64bit vs 32bit

If I create a database on 64bit version of SQL 2005 and then copy it to a
32bit version SQL 2005 will that database still work? and/or will
adminstrators have to make setting changes?All Editions of SQL within a major version maintain user database on-disk
compatibility across all architectures. That is a very complex way of
saying that any database created on any version/edition/processor
combination of SQL 2005 can be restored or copied to a SQL instance on any
other version/edition/processor combination. The sole exception is that SQL
Express will not accept a database over its 4GB size limit.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Sean" <Sean@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C85E4CF8-BA5D-4300-898F-49650A72627C@.microsoft.com...
> If I create a database on 64bit version of SQL 2005 and then copy it to a
> 32bit version SQL 2005 will that database still work? and/or will
> adminstrators have to make setting changes?|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--080803020901070905080703
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In other words "yes it will work, all other things being equal".
;)
--
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Geoff N. Hiten wrote:
>All Editions of SQL within a major version maintain user database on-disk
>compatibility across all architectures. That is a very complex way of
>saying that any database created on any version/edition/processor
>combination of SQL 2005 can be restored or copied to a SQL instance on any
>other version/edition/processor combination. The sole exception is that SQL
>Express will not accept a database over its 4GB size limit.
>
>
--080803020901070905080703
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<tt>In other words "yes it will work, all other things being equal".<br>
<br>
;)<br>
</tt>
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<p><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">--<br>
</font></span> <b><span lang="en-au"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">mike
hodgson</font></span></b><span lang="en-au"><br>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><a href="http://links.10026.com/?link=http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com">http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com</a></font></span>
</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Geoff N. Hiten wrote:
<blockquote cite="midOflGC5GoGHA.4172@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">All Editions of SQL within a major version maintain user database on-disk
compatibility across all architectures. That is a very complex way of
saying that any database created on any version/edition/processor
combination of SQL 2005 can be restored or copied to a SQL instance on any
other version/edition/processor combination. The sole exception is that SQL
Express will not accept a database over its 4GB size limit.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--080803020901070905080703--

64bit to 32bit connectivity

Main Point: Views I have on my 64bit server will UNION ALL to my 32bit server
to gather core data. The 32bit server view needs some staic data
(CountryCode) so it INNER JOINs back to the 64bit server to get the staic
data. This is extremely slow. On my 32bit => 32bit server it works fine, but
on this new 64bit => 32bit server it's dog slow.
Details:
My 32bit server has SP3a and the InstCat.sql from the 64bit
\SETUP\IA64\Install directory, I can now call my stored procedures that use
distributed views.
My previous server setup was:
Primary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterprise
Secondary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterprise
32bit Server (Primary;One Year of Data) + 32bit Server (Secondary; Seven
Years of Data)
My new server setup is:
Primary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 64bit; 64bit SQL Server Enterprise
Secondary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterprise
64bit Server (Primary;One Year of Data) + 32bit Server (Secondary; Seven
Years of Data)
The big problem: The views on the 64bit machine (64Views) UNION ALL to the
views on the 32bit machine (32Views) to allow me to retrieve data from both
machines. The concept of distributed views won't be discussed here for
brevity. These work fine.
But, as soon as I add to the 32Views, the SQL code that will INNER JOIN to
the CountryCodes static table on the 64bit machine it takes "forever"; 28
minutes to return a handful of records (162 to be exact). The reason for
doing this because I only want one location to store CountryCode details and
the 64bit machine is the primary machine to update these. I do have them on
the 32bit machine and I could change all my production machine databases to
look there, but I don't want to have to deal with this.
Tests:
On my previous setup of 32Views => 32Views => 32CountryCode, it works fine.
On a test of 64Views => 32Views, it works fine
Now, on the new setup of 64Views => 32Views => 64CountryCode, it is DOG SLOW.
Anyone help me. If you need some code I can probably put together a small
sample (instead of my big view sets). I will plan on that, but thought I
would at least get the question out into the newsgroup.
--
dbArchitect
Greg L. Wright"dbArchitect" <dbArchitect@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EE5AFA0D-BE0C-43F6-B4AE-37D52498A6B2@.microsoft.com...
> Main Point: Views I have on my 64bit server will UNION ALL to my 32bit
> server
> to gather core data. The 32bit server view needs some staic data
> (CountryCode) so it INNER JOINs back to the 64bit server to get the staic
> data. This is extremely slow. On my 32bit => 32bit server it works fine,
> but
> on this new 64bit => 32bit server it's dog slow.
>
Apart from figuring out why this is slow (or figuring out how on earth it
was ever _not_ slow), this seems like a case for replicating the static data
to the 32bit servers. You could use one of the built-in Replication types
or just schedule a job that runs
insert into CountryCode
select * from 64bitServer.MyDB.CountryCode
David

64bit to 32bit connectivity

Main Point: Views I have on my 64bit server will UNION ALL to my 32bit serve
r
to gather core data. The 32bit server view needs some staic data
(CountryCode) so it INNER JOINs back to the 64bit server to get the staic
data. This is extremely slow. On my 32bit => 32bit server it works fine, but
on this new 64bit => 32bit server it's dog slow.
Details:
My 32bit server has SP3a and the InstCat.sql from the 64bit
\SETUP\IA64\Install directory, I can now call my stored procedures that use
distributed views.
My previous server setup was:
Primary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterprise
Secondary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterpris
e
32bit Server (Primary;One Year of Data) + 32bit Server (Secondary; Seven
Years of Data)
My new server setup is:
Primary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 64bit; 64bit SQL Server Enterprise
Secondary = OS Window Advanced Server 2000 32bit; 32bit SQL Server Enterpris
e
64bit Server (Primary;One Year of Data) + 32bit Server (Secondary; Seven
Years of Data)
The big problem: The views on the 64bit machine (64Views) UNION ALL to the
views on the 32bit machine (32Views) to allow me to retrieve data from both
machines. The concept of distributed views won't be discussed here for
brevity. These work fine.
But, as soon as I add to the 32Views, the SQL code that will INNER JOIN to
the CountryCodes static table on the 64bit machine it takes "forever"; 28
minutes to return a handful of records (162 to be exact). The reason for
doing this because I only want one location to store CountryCode details and
the 64bit machine is the primary machine to update these. I do have them on
the 32bit machine and I could change all my production machine databases to
look there, but I don't want to have to deal with this.
Tests:
On my previous setup of 32Views => 32Views => 32CountryCode, it works fine.
On a test of 64Views => 32Views, it works fine
Now, on the new setup of 64Views => 32Views => 64CountryCode, it is DOG SLOW
.
Anyone help me. If you need some code I can probably put together a small
sample (instead of my big view sets). I will plan on that, but thought I
would at least get the question out into the newsgroup.
dbArchitect
Greg L. Wright"dbArchitect" <dbArchitect@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EE5AFA0D-BE0C-43F6-B4AE-37D52498A6B2@.microsoft.com...
> Main Point: Views I have on my 64bit server will UNION ALL to my 32bit
> server
> to gather core data. The 32bit server view needs some staic data
> (CountryCode) so it INNER JOINs back to the 64bit server to get the staic
> data. This is extremely slow. On my 32bit => 32bit server it works fine,
> but
> on this new 64bit => 32bit server it's dog slow.
>
Apart from figuring out why this is slow (or figuring out how on earth it
was ever _not_ slow), this seems like a case for replicating the static data
to the 32bit servers. You could use one of the built-in Replication types
or just schedule a job that runs
insert into CountryCode
select * from 64bitServer.MyDB.CountryCode
David

64bit SQl

Hello,
how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit installation.
The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
--
taniHi
Open Error Log and at the top should be written Microsoft SQL Server 2005 -
9.00.3042.00 (X64) which means 64 bit
"tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit installation.
> The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
> --
> tani|||sorry.. but where do I find the error log?
thanks
--
tani
"Uri Dimant" wrote:
> Hi
> Open Error Log and at the top should be written Microsoft SQL Server 2005 -
> 9.00.3042.00 (X64) which means 64 bit
> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
> > Hello,
> >
> > how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit installation.
> > The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
> > --
> > tani
>
>|||tani
Do you know the path of SQL Server installation?
By default, the error log is located at Program Files\Microsoft SQL
Server\MSSQL.n\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG
"tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E4D8091E-2BE7-4DBF-BC4F-E4FA72A32698@.microsoft.com...
> sorry.. but where do I find the error log?
> thanks
> --
> tani
>
> "Uri Dimant" wrote:
>> Hi
>> Open Error Log and at the top should be written Microsoft SQL Server
>> 2005 -
>> 9.00.3042.00 (X64) which means 64 bit
>> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit
>> > installation.
>> > The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
>> > --
>> > tani
>>|||Sorry.. I was looking on the completely wrong place..
I found it now.. thanks a lot!
--
tani
"Uri Dimant" wrote:
> tani
> Do you know the path of SQL Server installation?
> By default, the error log is located at Program Files\Microsoft SQL
> Server\MSSQL.n\MSSQL\LOG\ERRORLOG
>
>
> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:E4D8091E-2BE7-4DBF-BC4F-E4FA72A32698@.microsoft.com...
> > sorry.. but where do I find the error log?
> > thanks
> > --
> > tani
> >
> >
> > "Uri Dimant" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi
> >> Open Error Log and at the top should be written Microsoft SQL Server
> >> 2005 -
> >> 9.00.3042.00 (X64) which means 64 bit
> >>
> >> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit
> >> > installation.
> >> > The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
> >> > --
> >> > tani
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||TO add to Uri's response, you can get the same info using SELECT @.@.VERSION.
On my 64-but test machine, this returns:
Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.3054.00 (X64)
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
> Hello,
> how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit installation.
> The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
> --
> tani|||Dan
I did not think about it, thanks :-)))
Uh, its time to go home..
"Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:A1EA8611-5672-4555-8C8F-AA6DCB6EB3C6@.microsoft.com...
> TO add to Uri's response, you can get the same info using SELECT
> @.@.VERSION. On my 64-but test machine, this returns:
> Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.3054.00 (X64)
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "tani" <tani@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:508C63C4-BE8A-487C-B130-FA9008A51F15@.microsoft.com...
>> Hello,
>> how do I find out if my SQL iNstallation is a 64bit or 32bit
>> installation.
>> The OS is windows server 2003 64bit.
>> --
>> tani
>

64bit Server 32bit Client

I installed SQL 2005 on a 64bit server. Can I still use enterprise studio on a 32bit client machine?

The install CD's are 64bit and when I try to find the enterprise studio to install on my 32bit machine i get an error. Is there a place to download the 32bit enterprise studio? What are my options here?

Thanks in advance.

Mike

32 bit tools can happily talk to a 64 bit server.

64bit Primary with 32bit Secondary SQL 2005

Currently I have a standby server which is kept in synch from the primary via
log-shipping. Both are running SQL 2005 Standard sp1, on Windows 2003 Server
w/sp1. My primary is 64bit capable, but my secondary is not. Are there any
concerns running the primary as x64bit with log-shipping to a 32-bit machine
(other than performance and memory differences). Occasionaly I have to
switch production apps between the two servers. The log-shipping is a simple
tlog backup/restore, not Microsoft's log-shipping.That should not be a problem.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brandon" <Brandon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD1113A6-4937-49E4-8963-B2B8FC392456@.microsoft.com...
> Currently I have a standby server which is kept in synch from the primary
> via
> log-shipping. Both are running SQL 2005 Standard sp1, on Windows 2003
> Server
> w/sp1. My primary is 64bit capable, but my secondary is not. Are there
> any
> concerns running the primary as x64bit with log-shipping to a 32-bit
> machine
> (other than performance and memory differences). Occasionaly I have to
> switch production apps between the two servers. The log-shipping is a
> simple
> tlog backup/restore, not Microsoft's log-shipping.
>

64bit Primary with 32bit Secondary SQL 2005

Currently I have a standby server which is kept in synch from the primary vi
a
log-shipping. Both are running SQL 2005 Standard sp1, on Windows 2003 Serve
r
w/sp1. My primary is 64bit capable, but my secondary is not. Are there any
concerns running the primary as x64bit with log-shipping to a 32-bit machine
(other than performance and memory differences). Occasionaly I have to
switch production apps between the two servers. The log-shipping is a simpl
e
tlog backup/restore, not Microsoft's log-shipping.That should not be a problem.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Brandon" <Brandon@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD1113A6-4937-49E4-8963-B2B8FC392456@.microsoft.com...
> Currently I have a standby server which is kept in synch from the primary
> via
> log-shipping. Both are running SQL 2005 Standard sp1, on Windows 2003
> Server
> w/sp1. My primary is 64bit capable, but my secondary is not. Are there
> any
> concerns running the primary as x64bit with log-shipping to a 32-bit
> machine
> (other than performance and memory differences). Occasionaly I have to
> switch production apps between the two servers. The log-shipping is a
> simple
> tlog backup/restore, not Microsoft's log-shipping.
>

64bit or 32bit?

I want to get SQL Server 2005 for a clinic with 25 user but I am not sure if I should go for the 32bit or 64bit.. what's your recommendation? and why?

You are going to need to provide much more information than that before the question can be answered. However in general if your app is CPU or IO bound moving to 64 bit will not help, if it is memory bound it likely will(but not for sure).|||Clinic with 25 users data can be handled on a 32bit edition without any issues, as recenlty I have had setup of SQL 2005 32 bit on Win2k3 server with 8gb ram etc. without any issues. As referred if the application you are using has any specific requirement for 64 bit then you can consider in this case, it will be better if you are able to explain such requirements.|||

If you are getting new hardware, then I recommend getting 64 bit hardware and 64 bit SQL Server. There will be a longer 'service life' with 64 bit, and you don't know now how your needs will change over the lifecycle.

64bit Mirrored SQL Server Std with 32bit Witness?

I have two 64bit SQL Server Std servers that will be principal and mirror. I also need to stand up a witness. I already understand that the witness can be any version of SQL Server, but can the witness server be 32bit given the principal and mirror are 64bit?

Yes the witness can be 32-bit, I use a 32-bit Workgroup Edition witness with 64-bit Enterprise Edition Principal and Mirror.

64 Bit Subscriber Compability

I am going to buy 2 new 4 way 64 bit boxes and i was wondering if they are
going to be compatible for my current 32bit transactional replication.
In other words they are going to become subscribers of my current
replication. I read an article on microsoft that said that 64bit SQL
Replication will not work if the subscriber is a 32bit Edition of SQL, so i
am wondering if it will work the other way around.
Thank you,
Yovan Fernandez
My understanding is that it will work. Where is this article you are
referring to?
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a book on SQL Server replication?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
"Yovan Fernandez" <YovanFernandez@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:54D866E8-BBF4-4799-8224-1CC3B7F7AB07@.microsoft.com...
> I am going to buy 2 new 4 way 64 bit boxes and i was wondering if they
are
> going to be compatible for my current 32bit transactional replication.
> In other words they are going to become subscribers of my current
> replication. I read an article on microsoft that said that 64bit SQL
> Replication will not work if the subscriber is a 32bit Edition of SQL, so
i
> am wondering if it will work the other way around.
> --
> Thank you,
> Yovan Fernandez

64 bit Edition and 32bit Participate in VIRTUALSQL Cluster

Does anybody know if you can mix x64 and Itanium editions?

No, absolutely not.

Itanium and x64 are differenct processor architectures. Software that uses low level services has to be written for one or the other and cannot operate on both.

Granted, there is some software that may easily execute on both -but SQL Server is NOT able to execute on both.

|||Just to be clear I was asking if an x64 and an Itanium could participate in a cluster together.. not if the software would run of the respective machines?|||

There would be no point in clusting an x64 and Itanium machine together as the needed software wouldn't be able to run on both nodes.

Because the installers would be different you woulnd't be able to install SQL on the cluster.

Machines which are in a cluster should be of the same hardware architechurer.

64 bit Edition and 32bit Participate in VIRTUALSQL Cluster

Hi All

I have a requiment to update a SQL Cluster that I have, however we only have the budget to upgrade one of the servers participating in the Cluster.

Older servers are ML370 G4 Dual 3Ghz 10GB RAM - Windows 2003 Enterprise (existing)

the server I want to upgrade to is a

DL380 G5 Quad 3Ghz (Duo) - 20GB RAM - Windows 2003 Enterprise x64 edition (new)

I would also be upgrading to SQL 2005 Enterprise in the same upgrade (x64 edition on the new server)

What I want to know is if a x64bit Edition and a standard x86 edition both participate in the same VIRTUALSQL instance in a clustered environment?

Would appreciate assistance from any Microsoft people reading this post?

No,

All instances of SQL Server participating in a Cluster must be the same -either 32 bit or 64 bit.

However, you may want to consider running 32 bit SQL Server on the 64 bit Windows Server.

Or, you may forgo the Cluster, and using the 64 bit SQL Server as primary, create a Mirror server with the 32 bit server as a fail-over partner.

|||If you've got the cash for a SQL 2005 Enterprise license and a single DL380 don't skimp. Purchase another DL380, they aren't that expensive.