[mailto:dangerw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 2:52 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Sounding board on issue we are seeing with a Windows 2003
Cluster with SQL 2005
Crap...would not affect both nodes at the same time.
- WJR
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 13:50, William Robbins
CISSP, Network +, Security +
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
Email:ezi...@lifespan.org
Cell:401-639-3505
From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 2:44 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Sounding board on issue we are seeing with a
I don't think those were the clusters he was alluding to...
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 11:59 AM, William Robbins wrote:
> I'm not sure that cluster fscks count as "special experience." ;)
>
> - WJR
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 13:58, Jonathan Link wrote:
>
>> Agreed, and I knew what you said. :
I'm not sure that cluster fscks count as "special experience." ;)
- WJR
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 13:58, Jonathan Link wrote:
> Agreed, and I knew what you said. :-)
> I'm only speculating based on the time frame of the problem, as I'll fully
> admit I'm out of my depth of experience on cluster
Agreed, and I knew what you said. :-)
I'm only speculating based on the time frame of the problem, as I'll fully
admit I'm out of my depth of experience on clustered products. I know you
have special experience with clusters, so I bow out...
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:52 PM, William Robbins wrote:
Crap...would *not* affect both nodes at the same time.
- WJR
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 13:50, William Robbins wrote:
> Not underestimating the power of the luser variable...but I would expect
> that would affect both nodes at the same time.
>
> - WJR
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 13:43, Jonath
Not underestimating the power of the luser variable...but I would expect
that would affect both nodes at the same time.
- WJR
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 13:43, Jonathan Link wrote:
> Pure speculation, but the time frame to me screams:
> User runs a manual query that in their experience takes a lo
Pure speculation, but the time frame to me screams:
User runs a manual query that in their experience takes a long time to
process (they don't know why) so they set it to start as they leave for the
day, and then take action on the results the next day...
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Ziots, E
fespan.org
>
> Cell:401-639-3505
>
>
>
> *From:* William Robbins [mailto:dangerw...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 18, 2011 11:46 AM
>
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Sounding board on issue we are seeing with a Windows 2003
> Cluster with S
401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: William Robbins [mailto:dangerw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 10:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Sounding board on issue we are seeing with a Windows 2003
Cluster with SQL 2005
Also that's a very specific timeframe...eve
, February 18, 2011 12:39 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Sounding board on issue we are seeing with a Windows 2003
Cluster with SQL 2005
SQL Backup, Anti-Virus dat update or Scan initiation?
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Miller Bonnie L.
wrote:
Any scheduled tasks in Windows or
SQL Backup, Anti-Virus dat update or Scan initiation?
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Miller Bonnie L. <
mille...@mukilteo.wednet.edu> wrote:
> Any scheduled tasks in Windows or within SQL? Or, a task running against
> SQL (maybe check other servers or workstations that reference the cluster
>
Any scheduled tasks in Windows or within SQL? Or, a task running against SQL
(maybe check other servers or workstations that reference the cluster for their
DBs for scheduled tasks). Could also fire up a performance and netmon capture
during the timeframe to see if anything jumps out at you.
Lifespan Organization
> Email:ezi...@lifespan.org
> Cell:401-639-3505
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: William Robbins [mailto:dangerw...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 10:33 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Sounding board on issue we are
rg
Cell:401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: William Robbins [mailto:dangerw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 10:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Sounding board on issue we are seeing with a Windows 2003 Cluster
with SQL 2005
Also that's a very specific
Also that's a very specific timeframe...even if it's not backups on
the cluster, could there be a backup or scheduled task on another
server on the same switch in that timeframe?
Feel free to tell me to STFU...I'm just spitballing. :)
- WJR
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 07:48, Ziots, Edward wrote
Stupid question/suggestion: Have you tried taking the passive node
offline to see if the database disconnect still occurs?
Changing switches, as you mentioned would be my next, saner, suggestion.
- WJR
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 07:48, Ziots, Edward wrote:
> I have a two node X64bit Windows 20
17 matches
Mail list logo
