Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Failover Clustering and Windows Data Recovery to recover Lost Data

The Failover Clustering services are very important for those organization which are involved in line-of-business and business-critical e-commerce applications. The Failover cluster is applied for increasing the availability of services and applications. Sometimes this feature may cause a data loss problem in Windows 2003 which demands a windows data recovery to tackle the issue.

Here are some symptoms with Microsoft Windows 2003 Failover Clustering:

The shared resources become inaccessible even if the resources are displayed online by the administrator.

Error message is logged into Cluster.log file:

00000930.00000af8::{2003/01/01 23:00:00.001} File Share ShareName: Share has gone offline, Error=64!
00000930.00000934::{2003/01/01 23:00:00.001} File Share ShareName: Share has gone offline, error=64!

Click on Start, Run, cmd.exe
Type "Net HelpMsg 64"
"The specified network name is no longer available."

Description: Cluster File Share resource 'ShareName' has failed a status check. The error code is 32.

Click on Start, Run, cmd.exe
Type "Net HelpMsg 32"
"The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process."

The inaccessible data can be retrieved with the help of windows data recovery software by sorting it out.

Reason for this behavior

It occurs when ClusSvc.exe (Cluster service) cannot carry out the IsAlive test against File Share resources. Failure causes Server service not to be able to keep up with demand for network work processes that network layer of Input/Output stream queues. The problem also occurs due to corruption to hard drive volume or file system.

Resolution

Running Chkdsk utility to check file system could solve the issue upto some extent. But, it cannot solve the severe corruption issues and there arises the need data recovery software.

The windows data recovery software applies an advanced scanning techniques to recover all lost or deleted data from windows hard drive.

No comments:

Post a Comment