SQL Server 2000/2005 Failover Clustering 101 by MS

Posted 05 April 2007 18:26 by JohnParker

Had a funny problem at work to do with clustering, we're not entirely sure if there was a problem with the cluster because we removed Builtin\Administrators.  I was the third person brought in to resolve this problem so I'm not quite sure what fixed it.  I find clustering kinda scary but also really interesting.  Anyways, two links if you're interested

SQL Server 2000 Failover Clustering

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/failclus.mspx

SQL Server 2005 Failover Clustering White Paper ( for download )

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=818234dc-a17b-4f09-b282-c6830fead499&DisplayLang=en

The problem we had was related to this...

 BUG: IsAlive check does not run under the context of the BUILTIN\Administrators account in SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=291255

Comments

# re: SQL Server 2000/2005 Failover Clustering 101 by MS

10 April 2007 11:07 by Colin Leversuch-Roberts

denying/removing builtin admins on a cluster is a different kettle of fish to a stand alone server, this has been well documented since w2k/sql2k and has to be handled with care - you just can't remove it!!  I don't have the links to hand just now but it's something similar to "how to impede administrators on a sql 2000 cluster" afaik nothing has changed with w2k3 and sql2005. I hope this wasn't a production system.

# re: SQL Server 2000/2005 Failover Clustering 101 by MS

24 July 2007 17:18 by Carl Tillotson

# re: SQL Server 2000/2005 Failover Clustering 101 by MS

07 August 2007 10:12 by JohnParker

Hi Carl,

This is from the Clustering Article itself, the missing link as you put it.  Surely the missing link is referring to apes and human beings?

If corporate policy requires restricting access please follow the instructions documented in Knowledge Base article, "263712 INF: How to impede Windows NT administrators from administering a clustered instance of SQL Server"

many thanks for pointing out the article,

John P.