I am presently trying to install a  windows cluster on windows 2003
enterprise edition. After i configure the cluster service on the windows
server. I will require to install a default instance of SQL 2000 although the
version is old i will update it with sp4. My client then ...

Just wondered what peoples opinions were on the advantages of using
clustering over DB mirroring introduced in SQL 2005? From what I can see
having briefly looked into things is that the mirroring offers potentially a
less complex and cheaper solution not to mention the fact that ...

I turned off the passive part of the cluster.  When I try to connect via DSN,
to an instance of SQL ServerI receive the error "SQL Server does not exist".  
Is this due to the fact that the passive cluster is shutdown?

Since the beginning of the week, we get strange errors in our event
log:
[sqsrvres] CheckQueryProcessorAlive: sqlexecdirect failed
[sqsrvres] printODBCError: sqlstate = 08S01; native error = 2746;

I can seem to find any official Microsoft info on upgrading a SQl 2005
cluster to server 2003 sp2.  The release notes dont mention an upgrade in a
cluster.  I've done a few SP upgrades in a cluster before and the steps I
would take are:

I have a 2-node active/active cluster (SQL2KSP4 on Win2003sp1)
supporting 3 instances (2 on one node, 1 on the other). I've received
funding to upgrade the instances by adding new host nodes with
better/faster hardware (Yay!).

I have a windows 2000 advanced server with SQL Server 2000.  Should the
disks drives that store databases in them be in the dependencies property
within the SQL IP Address?
Thanks,

I have a two node Windows 2003 Adv. Cluster setup. I have also installed a
clustered instance of SQL2000 Ent as well as SQL 2005 Ent each on this
cluster. Each of my nodes has 16GB RAM. My goal is to setup 7GB RAM for each
of the SQL servers and leave 2 for OS and other Apps etc.

I've a problem trying to execute a SSIS package inside a SQL Job that uses a
credential/proxy account.
The sql job hist error msg is:
Message

I'm running a SQL Server 2000 SP4 2-node active/acitve cluster on
Windows 2003 Server Enterprise Edition SP1. I changed the subnet mask
of my public network config, as well as the MCS virtual subnet and two
database resource subnets (all are using the same subnet). DNS is

I'm looking at MSFT press book for SQL 2005 and they say and active / active
cluster needs two virtual server names.  
Can anyone confirm or deny if this is true for SQL 2000?

I have a problem with a Windows 2000 two node active/active cluster.
TCP/IP connectivity to one of the nodes fails with "Cannot generate SSPI
context."  The other node is fine.
I know this is typically an SPN error, but I'm unsure what the SPN

We have a two node cluster with two groups on them (W2K3).  Each group has a
sql 2k instance running and the groups each reside on a node, failing over to
the other if necessary.  My question is that we were looking to upgrade, but
are only able to upgrade the one instance to 2K5 ...

Apologies if this isn't the right forum.
I have an instance of sql (2005) setup called SQL1\SQL1
I am trying to connect to a database (hm1) using the following connection
string in my web.config:

I'd like to run a SQL 2000 instance and a SQL2005 instance on the same
two node windows cluster.
Each would have it's own disk groups.
Basically mixed versions of instances on a cluster.