Windows Server Failover Clustering Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Reviews & Insights

Score10 out of 10

39 Reviews and Ratings

Community insights

TrustRadius Insights for Windows Server Failover Clustering are summaries of user sentiment data from TrustRadius reviews and, when necessary, third party data sources.

Pros

Flexibility in Maintenance Tasks: Users have expressed satisfaction with the ability to conduct maintenance and patching on the passive node without requiring database shutdown, thus minimizing operational downtime significantly. This feature enables them to keep their systems up-to-date and secure without disrupting critical operations, showcasing the product's adaptability to dynamic IT environments.

Automated Recovery Assistance: Several reviewers have highlighted the value of the automated recovery feature, which enables swift system recovery without the need for IT intervention in case of failures or disruptions. This functionality instills confidence in users by providing a reliable failover mechanism that ensures business continuity and minimizes potential data loss during unexpected events.

User-Friendly Interface and Robust Documentation: Customers appreciate the product's intuitive interface that allows for easy out-of-the-box usage. Additionally, they find the readily available documentation to be a valuable resource for reference and troubleshooting. The combination of a user-friendly design and comprehensive documentation streamlines adoption processes, empowers users to maximize product capabilities effectively, and reduces the learning curve associated with implementing new technologies within their organizations.

Windows Server Failover Clustering Reviews

1 Review

Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesInformation Technology & Services1

Not the most stable, but so useful

Rating: 10 out of 10

Incentivized

August 30, 2016

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

We started using Failover Clustering a while ago with Windows 2008 Hyper-V. We had a lot of issues (Cluster crash) and upgraded to 2008 R2, 2012 and 2012 R2, with the same issues. However, the cluster may not be a 100% stable, but it helps a lot regarding maintenance and upgrade. Instead of having to shutdown everything, we move the virtual machines from one host to another. When a VM job in the kernel, the full cluster goes down. We than started using Failover clustering for File Share and Scale-Out File-Share to host company files, and VMs (over SMB3). At some point we had one of the host that crashed, and when hard-rebooted, the other host when down because of the failover cluster. Also, when moving the FileShare roles from one host to the other, the disk 'time-out' for a while, that makes the file server very slow. It's not perfect, but it's very useful

Pros

Maintenance - You can move all the roles to the other host, and update/upgrade without interruption.
Integrated - Based for many roles in Windows Server
Easy to use - Not many options, but easy to figure out

Cons

Limited - Not much you can configure or tweak
Unstable - Sometimes dies for no reason
Cluster Validation - It never goes right. Always a lot of errors

Likelihood to Recommend

This is very good to help your availability for your maintenance, but you should not based your full infrastructure on it. Make sure to backup, and monitor.

Tommy Boucher

IT Director in Information Technology at Coveo (Information Technology and Services, 201-500 employees)

Vetted Review

6 years of experience

View profile