New Version of Double-Take Seems To Solve Many Issues

Apr 21, 2012

A couple of years ago, I wrote a blog post comparing a couple of different methods and/or products for SQL Server disaster recovery. Over the last couple of weeks, my company has had the opportunity to test the pre-release version of the latest version of Double-Take. I want to make it clear; this blog post is not an endorsement or criticism of the product, rather just some first impressions.

Some History

About four years ago, my company chose Double-Take as a disaster recovery solution because we were in the middle of relocating our data center across the country and we now owned a hotsite. This product, mind you, was chosen by a group of people that completely excluded any DBAs. We stumbled through what seemed to be a very kludgey installation process and finally got it to work on a couple of servers. We then proceeded to install this on all of our servers and were able to successfully use this to transfer all of our SQL Server instances to new hardware in our new data center. Compared to many of the options available four or so years ago, this was considered a big win.

 

Once the new data center was set up, we then proceeded to attempt to get it installed between the new servers in our new data center and the servers in our hotsite. For many of our servers, the installation went as expected (at least from our installation experiences from the data center move exercise) and we quickly got Double-Take mirroring up and running on several servers. The problem came when we tried to use Double-Take to mirror several mission critical servers that happened to sit in our DMZ. Because we were mirroring a server from our production data center that sat in the DMZ, we also had to mirror to a hotsite server that sat in a different DMZ. This exposed a huge weakness in the Double-Take product. Try as we may, we could not get the two servers talking across the two DMZ’s because Double-Take was dependent on WMI calls which meant that the ports used by WMI were dynamic and you could not predict which of the almost 65,000 ports it would choose, not a good thing for a DMZ as our network group was not going to open up all 65,000 ports in the DMZ (and rightfully so) for these two servers just to get Double-Take to work.

 

Today

Fast forward four years and our DR strategy for our DMZ servers hadn’t really progressed much. That is until we pressed our account management team at Vision Solutions (the company that now owns Double-Take) as we were very tempted to just to drop all of the licenses because of the limitations of the software. After meeting with a couple of their engineers, we received a pre-release version of Double-Take 6 which has thankfully removed all dependence on WMI. With Double-Take 6, we only have to open up a maximum of four ports to get this to mirror an instance across the two DMZ’s. The test installation, after a couple of hiccups (this is pre-release software, after all), went fairly well and it is looking promising. We still need to do a comparison against servers running SQL Server 2012 to test its AlwaysOn capabilities against those of Double-Take and compare the costs to see which works best for us in the long run, but for now, I think we finally have a DR solution for our DMZ in Double-Take. And even if the AlwaysOn technology in SQL Server 2012 proves to be just as or more powerful, there is no way that I will be moving 160+ SQL Server instances to SQL Server 2012 any time soon. So here is hoping for continued success with Double-Take as a DR solution in our environment.

Posted by tledwards | Categories: Administration, DBAs, HA/DR, Uncategorized |

Share with others

No Responses so far | Have Your Say!

Leave a Feedback

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree Plugin