Advice needed

We are preparing to migrating to SQL Server 2005 from 2000 and to implement a
High Availability solution.
Has anyone got any suggestions in choosing between Clustering and Database
mirroring from your implementation experiences?More folks with high availablitiy experience attend to the Clustering group.
You may want to post there.
Since db mirroring is relatively new, there is far more 'real' experience
with clustering options to draw upon.
--
Arnie Rowland*
"To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
"SAM" <SAM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:11EBAC7B-C98C-4BB3-8D63-F5BB37F38D9F@.microsoft.com...
> We are preparing to migrating to SQL Server 2005 from 2000 and to
> implement a
> High Availability solution.
> Has anyone got any suggestions in choosing between Clustering and Database
> mirroring from your implementation experiences?|||Thank you. is the clustering group under Windows 2003 server or SQL Server
newsgroups?
"Arnie Rowland" wrote:
> More folks with high availablitiy experience attend to the Clustering group.
> You may want to post there.
> Since db mirroring is relatively new, there is far more 'real' experience
> with clustering options to draw upon.
> --
> Arnie Rowland*
> "To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
>
> "SAM" <SAM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:11EBAC7B-C98C-4BB3-8D63-F5BB37F38D9F@.microsoft.com...
> > We are preparing to migrating to SQL Server 2005 from 2000 and to
> > implement a
> > High Availability solution.
> >
> > Has anyone got any suggestions in choosing between Clustering and Database
> > mirroring from your implementation experiences?
>
>|||microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering
--
Arnie Rowland*
"To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
"SAM" <SAM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0F693B30-686D-4072-8BFB-EE133690E2FE@.microsoft.com...
> Thank you. is the clustering group under Windows 2003 server or SQL Server
> newsgroups?
> "Arnie Rowland" wrote:
>> More folks with high availablitiy experience attend to the Clustering
>> group.
>> You may want to post there.
>> Since db mirroring is relatively new, there is far more 'real' experience
>> with clustering options to draw upon.
>> --
>> Arnie Rowland*
>> "To be successful, your heart must accompany your knowledge."
>>
>> "SAM" <SAM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:11EBAC7B-C98C-4BB3-8D63-F5BB37F38D9F@.microsoft.com...
>> > We are preparing to migrating to SQL Server 2005 from 2000 and to
>> > implement a
>> > High Availability solution.
>> >
>> > Has anyone got any suggestions in choosing between Clustering and
>> > Database
>> > mirroring from your implementation experiences?
>>|||"SAM" <SAM@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:11EBAC7B-C98C-4BB3-8D63-F5BB37F38D9F@.microsoft.com...
> We are preparing to migrating to SQL Server 2005 from 2000 and to
implement a
> High Availability solution.
> Has anyone got any suggestions in choosing between Clustering and Database
> mirroring from your implementation experiences?
Keep in mind the key differences.
Clustering is a complete failover. It's more for a hardware failure
(excluding the shared disks of course.) It operates at the server level.
Mirroring mirrors at the database level. So you have to make sure to keep
logins in synch across servers etc.