Single Server (Replica) Availability Group





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}






up vote
5
down vote

favorite












First time caller, long time listener.



I have a situation where I need to stand up a single server Availability Group for around 2 months (i.e. move DBs to a new server, rebuild the current server, and add the rebuilt current server to the AG). Both servers are physical and have roughly the same specs. Windows Server 2016, SQL Server 2014.



My thought was to stand up the AG with the listener now so that when the current server is rebuilt and added to the group, we wouldn't need to add the listener then and update all of our apps/clients (i.e. that would force two migrations, one to the new server, one for the new listener).



I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected. I also can't foresee a reason not to do this, but I thought it would be worth the community ask since we're talking about Production DBs. My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues? Would anyone recommend against this solution. Thanks.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.


























    up vote
    5
    down vote

    favorite












    First time caller, long time listener.



    I have a situation where I need to stand up a single server Availability Group for around 2 months (i.e. move DBs to a new server, rebuild the current server, and add the rebuilt current server to the AG). Both servers are physical and have roughly the same specs. Windows Server 2016, SQL Server 2014.



    My thought was to stand up the AG with the listener now so that when the current server is rebuilt and added to the group, we wouldn't need to add the listener then and update all of our apps/clients (i.e. that would force two migrations, one to the new server, one for the new listener).



    I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected. I also can't foresee a reason not to do this, but I thought it would be worth the community ask since we're talking about Production DBs. My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues? Would anyone recommend against this solution. Thanks.










    share|improve this question







    New contributor




    Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite











      First time caller, long time listener.



      I have a situation where I need to stand up a single server Availability Group for around 2 months (i.e. move DBs to a new server, rebuild the current server, and add the rebuilt current server to the AG). Both servers are physical and have roughly the same specs. Windows Server 2016, SQL Server 2014.



      My thought was to stand up the AG with the listener now so that when the current server is rebuilt and added to the group, we wouldn't need to add the listener then and update all of our apps/clients (i.e. that would force two migrations, one to the new server, one for the new listener).



      I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected. I also can't foresee a reason not to do this, but I thought it would be worth the community ask since we're talking about Production DBs. My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues? Would anyone recommend against this solution. Thanks.










      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      First time caller, long time listener.



      I have a situation where I need to stand up a single server Availability Group for around 2 months (i.e. move DBs to a new server, rebuild the current server, and add the rebuilt current server to the AG). Both servers are physical and have roughly the same specs. Windows Server 2016, SQL Server 2014.



      My thought was to stand up the AG with the listener now so that when the current server is rebuilt and added to the group, we wouldn't need to add the listener then and update all of our apps/clients (i.e. that would force two migrations, one to the new server, one for the new listener).



      I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected. I also can't foresee a reason not to do this, but I thought it would be worth the community ask since we're talking about Production DBs. My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues? Would anyone recommend against this solution. Thanks.







      sql-server availability-groups






      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor




      Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 18 hours ago









      Select 'DBA'

      284




      284




      New contributor




      Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Select 'DBA' is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted











          First time caller, long time listener.




          Ha! Love it! Welcome :)




          I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected.




          You are correct, it should work without many if any issues. Since clustering will now be part of the scenario you don't get a free single node lunch... you're still beholden to any cluster or AG level issues that may arise (I'm not saying they will, just that it's now in the issues list).




          My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues?




          I have, in fact, tried this. It does work, the 2-months part does give me a little bit of uneasiness... but assuming the configuration doesn't drift, you should be alright.



          You can also pre-stage a listener by creating a DNS entry with the same name so connection strings don't change, use a network appliance or hardware load balancer, etc. The largest issue is enabling the Always On manager and the service restart required for it, in my opinion. All else (except the listener unless you do the DNS/HLB thing) should or can be transparent.




          Would anyone recommend against this solution.




          I only have the reservations of getting used to the single server performance characteristics and then adding in a synchronous replica or such afterwards. Since the single node AG won't have sync_commit waits and such, you really won't be in for much of a shock... though this could change once the other node is added. Just something to think about.






          share|improve this answer





















            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "182"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });






            Select 'DBA' is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f222591%2fsingle-server-replica-availability-group%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            7
            down vote



            accepted











            First time caller, long time listener.




            Ha! Love it! Welcome :)




            I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected.




            You are correct, it should work without many if any issues. Since clustering will now be part of the scenario you don't get a free single node lunch... you're still beholden to any cluster or AG level issues that may arise (I'm not saying they will, just that it's now in the issues list).




            My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues?




            I have, in fact, tried this. It does work, the 2-months part does give me a little bit of uneasiness... but assuming the configuration doesn't drift, you should be alright.



            You can also pre-stage a listener by creating a DNS entry with the same name so connection strings don't change, use a network appliance or hardware load balancer, etc. The largest issue is enabling the Always On manager and the service restart required for it, in my opinion. All else (except the listener unless you do the DNS/HLB thing) should or can be transparent.




            Would anyone recommend against this solution.




            I only have the reservations of getting used to the single server performance characteristics and then adding in a synchronous replica or such afterwards. Since the single node AG won't have sync_commit waits and such, you really won't be in for much of a shock... though this could change once the other node is added. Just something to think about.






            share|improve this answer

























              up vote
              7
              down vote



              accepted











              First time caller, long time listener.




              Ha! Love it! Welcome :)




              I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected.




              You are correct, it should work without many if any issues. Since clustering will now be part of the scenario you don't get a free single node lunch... you're still beholden to any cluster or AG level issues that may arise (I'm not saying they will, just that it's now in the issues list).




              My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues?




              I have, in fact, tried this. It does work, the 2-months part does give me a little bit of uneasiness... but assuming the configuration doesn't drift, you should be alright.



              You can also pre-stage a listener by creating a DNS entry with the same name so connection strings don't change, use a network appliance or hardware load balancer, etc. The largest issue is enabling the Always On manager and the service restart required for it, in my opinion. All else (except the listener unless you do the DNS/HLB thing) should or can be transparent.




              Would anyone recommend against this solution.




              I only have the reservations of getting used to the single server performance characteristics and then adding in a synchronous replica or such afterwards. Since the single node AG won't have sync_commit waits and such, you really won't be in for much of a shock... though this could change once the other node is added. Just something to think about.






              share|improve this answer























                up vote
                7
                down vote



                accepted







                up vote
                7
                down vote



                accepted







                First time caller, long time listener.




                Ha! Love it! Welcome :)




                I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected.




                You are correct, it should work without many if any issues. Since clustering will now be part of the scenario you don't get a free single node lunch... you're still beholden to any cluster or AG level issues that may arise (I'm not saying they will, just that it's now in the issues list).




                My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues?




                I have, in fact, tried this. It does work, the 2-months part does give me a little bit of uneasiness... but assuming the configuration doesn't drift, you should be alright.



                You can also pre-stage a listener by creating a DNS entry with the same name so connection strings don't change, use a network appliance or hardware load balancer, etc. The largest issue is enabling the Always On manager and the service restart required for it, in my opinion. All else (except the listener unless you do the DNS/HLB thing) should or can be transparent.




                Would anyone recommend against this solution.




                I only have the reservations of getting used to the single server performance characteristics and then adding in a synchronous replica or such afterwards. Since the single node AG won't have sync_commit waits and such, you really won't be in for much of a shock... though this could change once the other node is added. Just something to think about.






                share|improve this answer













                First time caller, long time listener.




                Ha! Love it! Welcome :)




                I've tested this situation on a few test servers and its working as expected.




                You are correct, it should work without many if any issues. Since clustering will now be part of the scenario you don't get a free single node lunch... you're still beholden to any cluster or AG level issues that may arise (I'm not saying they will, just that it's now in the issues list).




                My question is has anyone tried this and had any issues?




                I have, in fact, tried this. It does work, the 2-months part does give me a little bit of uneasiness... but assuming the configuration doesn't drift, you should be alright.



                You can also pre-stage a listener by creating a DNS entry with the same name so connection strings don't change, use a network appliance or hardware load balancer, etc. The largest issue is enabling the Always On manager and the service restart required for it, in my opinion. All else (except the listener unless you do the DNS/HLB thing) should or can be transparent.




                Would anyone recommend against this solution.




                I only have the reservations of getting used to the single server performance characteristics and then adding in a synchronous replica or such afterwards. Since the single node AG won't have sync_commit waits and such, you really won't be in for much of a shock... though this could change once the other node is added. Just something to think about.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 18 hours ago









                Sean Gallardy

                14.6k22346




                14.6k22346






















                    Select 'DBA' is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded


















                    Select 'DBA' is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                    Select 'DBA' is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                    Select 'DBA' is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.















                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f222591%2fsingle-server-replica-availability-group%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Quarter-circle Tiles

                    build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

                    Mont Emei