From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0759_01C565B7.E32E4C90
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   Nope.  There should be some SQL Server 2005 info on =
www.microsoft.com.

Rich

  "Ellen K."  wrote in message =
news:ea2o91dfssf3j9lidmatlbtiesa3io724b{at}4ax.com...
  I read that SS2005 will have failover in the version between the new
  Enterprise and the new Standard, do you know anything about that?

  On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:51:41 -0700, "Rich"  wrote in message
  :

  >   Failover too.  See =
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_clustering_7t9v.asp.
  >
  >Rich
  >=20
  >  "Ellen K."  wrote in message =
news:hi2n91ls9oid6pk6ltj4oiue65m9f9do3d{at}4ax.com...
  >  Well, but isn't clustering really for load balancing?  My SQL =
Servers
  >  barely break a sweat during the day.  (Besides which SQL Server =
2000
  >  requires Enterprise Edition for clustering, but can do replication =
with
  >  Standard... at a cost differential of about 4 to 1.)
  >
  >  On Mon, 30 May 2005 00:08:56 -0700, "Rich" 
wrote in message
  >  :
  >
  >  >   You should though there is clustering software for this purpose =
that would probably be more appropriate.
  >  >
  >  >Rich
  >  >
  >  >  "Ellen K."  wrote
in message =
news:jmpk91ps7mqev59btj3aan8o3hh9is5boc{at}4ax.com...
  >  >  Do you think I could use this for hot failover?   I.e. have a =
standby
  >  >  SQL Server box with the boot partition cloned and full =
transactional
  >  >  replication of the database and if the production box fails just =
change
  >  >  the IP address of the clone?
  >  >
  >  >  On Sun, 29 May 2005 00:54:56 -0700, "Rich"
 wrote in message
  >  >  :
  >  >
  >  >  >   Yes and Windows 2000 too.  What probably has gotten better =
are applications that register to be notified of network configuration =
changes and respond so that they don't need to be restarted.  =
NotifyAddrChange and NotifyRouteChange, two such APIs, were introduced = in
Windows 2000.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >   I'm curious why George had to reboot unless he was running a =
third party network service that did not include support for address = changes.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >Rich
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  "Ellen K." 
wrote in message =
news:bpmi915js372v2p66g453g1ogsrlmvlieg{at}4ax.com...
  >  >  >  Does that also apply to Server 2003?  Because that would =
solve one
  >  >  >  important issue I have at work.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  On Sat, 28 May 2005 12:56:59 -0400, Mike N. =

  >  >  >  wrote in message =
:
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  >On Fri, 27 May 2005 16:47:16 -0400, "Geo." =
 wrote:
  >  >  >  >
  >  >  >  >>Ok so how about listing some of the features you think =
makes XP worth
  >  >  >  >>upgrading to?
  >  >  >  >
  >  >  >  >  To me, just being able to change the IP address without =
rebooting makes
  >  >  >  >it worthwhile.  Sometimes 2000 would be able to do
this, but =
most of the
  >  >  >  >time I had to reboot.

------=_NextPart_000_0759_01C565B7.E32E4C90
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








  
Nope.  There should =
be some SQL=20
Server 2005 info on www.microsoft.com.;">http://www.microsoft.com">www.microsoft.com.;
 
Rich
 

  "Ellen K." <72322.1016{at}compuserve.com&g=">mailto:72322.1016{at}compuserve.com">72322.1016{at}compuserve.com&g=
t;=20
  wrote in message news:ea2o91dfssf=
3j9lidmatlbtiesa3io724b{at}4ax.com...I=20
  read that SS2005 will have failover in the version between the=20
  newEnterprise and the new Standard, do you know anything about=20
  that?On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:51:41 -0700,
"Rich" <{at}> =
wrote in=20
  message<429b9824{at}w3.nls.net>:&=">mailto:429b9824{at}w3.nls.net">429b9824{at}w3.nls.net>:&=
gt;  =20
  Failover too.  See http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_clustering_7t=
9v.asp">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/adminsql/ad_clustering_7t=
9v.asp.>>Rich>=20
  >  "Ellen K." <72322.1016{at}compuserve.com&g=">mailto:72322.1016{at}compuserve.com">72322.1016{at}compuserve.com&g=
t;=20
  wrote in message news:hi2n91ls9oi=
d6pk6ltj4oiue65m9f9do3d{at}4ax.com...> =20
  Well, but isn't clustering really for load balancing?  My SQL=20
  Servers>  barely break a sweat during the
day.  =
(Besides=20
  which SQL Server 2000>  requires Enterprise
Edition for=20
  clustering, but can do replication with> 
Standard... at a =
cost=20
  differential of about 4 to
1.)>>  On Mon, 30 May =
2005=20
  00:08:56 -0700, "Rich" <{at}> wrote in
message>  <429abb1d{at}w3.nls.net>:><=">mailto:429abb1d{at}w3.nls.net">429abb1d{at}w3.nls.net>:><=
BR>> =20
  >   You should though there is clustering software for =
this=20
  purpose that would probably be more appropriate.> =20
  >> 
>Rich> 
>>  =
>  "Ellen=20
  K." <72322.1016{at}compuserve.com&g=">mailto:72322.1016{at}compuserve.com">72322.1016{at}compuserve.com&g=
t;=20
  wrote in message news:jmpk91ps7mq=
ev59btj3aan8o3hh9is5boc{at}4ax.com...> =20
  >  Do you think I could use this for hot
failover?   =
I.e.=20
  have a standby>  >  SQL Server
box with the boot =
partition=20
  cloned and full transactional> 
>  replication of =
the=20
  database and if the production box fails just change>  =
> =20
  the IP address of the clone?> 
>>  =
>  On=20
  Sun, 29 May 2005 00:54:56 -0700, "Rich" <{at}> wrote in=20
  message>  >  <42997474$1{at}w3.nls.net>:&=">mailto:42997474$1{at}w3.nls.net">42997474$1{at}w3.nls.net>:&=
gt; =20
  >>  > 
>   Yes and Windows 2000 =
too. =20
  What probably has gotten better are applications that register to be =
notified=20
  of network configuration changes and respond so that they don't need =
to be=20
  restarted.  NotifyAddrChange and NotifyRouteChange, two such =
APIs, were=20
  introduced in Windows 2000.>  >  =
>> =20
  >  >   I'm curious why George
had to reboot =
unless he was=20
  running a third party network service that did not include support for =
address=20
  changes.>  > 
>>  > =20
  >Rich>  > 
>>  >  =
> =20
  "Ellen K." <72322.1016{at}compuserve.com&g=">mailto:72322.1016{at}compuserve.com">72322.1016{at}compuserve.com&g=
t;=20
  wrote in message news:bpmi915js37=
2v2p66g453g1ogsrlmvlieg{at}4ax.com...> =20
  >  >  Does that also apply to Server
2003?  =
Because that=20
  would solve one>  > 
>  important issue I =
have at=20
  work.>  > 
>>  >  =
>  On=20
  Sat, 28 May 2005 12:56:59 -0400, Mike N. <mike{at}u-spam-u-die.net>&g=">mailto:mike{at}u-spam-u-die.net">mike{at}u-spam-u-die.net>&g=
t; =20
  >  >  wrote in message <al8h9113b4k3r8=">mailto:al8h9113b4k3r88n0tpv83t4gdqlo5f24m{at}4ax.com">al8h9113b4k3r8=
8n0tpv83t4gdqlo5f24m{at}4ax.com>:> =20
  >  >> 
>  >  >On Fri, 27 May =
2005=20
  16:47:16 -0400, "Geo." <fake{at}barkdom.com>">mailto:fake{at}barkdom.com">fake{at}barkdom.com> =
wrote:> =20
  >  > 
>>  >  > 
=
>>Ok so=20
  how about listing some of the features you think makes XP =
worth> =20
  >  >  >>upgrading
to?>  > =20
  >  >> 
>  >  >  To me, =
just=20
  being able to change the IP address without rebooting =
makes> =20
  >  >  >it worthwhile. 
Sometimes 2000 would be =
able to=20
  do this, but most of the>  > 
>  >time =
I had to=20
  reboot.

------=_NextPart_000_0759_01C565B7.E32E4C90--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5