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.
We utilized Windows Server Failover Clustering as an integral part of a MS SQL cluster setup. We utilized it for almost zero downtime on our Microsoft SQL serving our on prem Sharepoint implementations, as well as several critical IT infrastructure systems that need a SQL database back end. This allows us to perform maintenance and patching without affecting the applications that use the SQL server. It's deployed on a active passive setup. We also set up a test Hyper-V high availability cluster.
Pros
It allows us to perform maintenance and patching on the passive node without having to shutdown the database and incurring downtime.
We are able to repair a failed server but failing the database over if there is a hardware failure on the active node. Minimizing downtime on the database.
It provides an automated recovery when there is failure without IT intervention when there is an issue.
Cons
The setup of the Windows Server Failover Clustering is complex, requiring different networks and multiple network cards.
Better integration between the Windows Failover clustering and Hyper-V. Unlike VMWare you have to make changes to two places instead of just one panel.
I wish there was a web portal to manage the cluster. Instead you have to remote desktop into the VIP address and go to the Cluster manager.
Likelihood to Recommend
It works fantastic in conjuncture with the MS SQL cluster setup. When a SQL node had a hardware failure, it failed over to the passive node. No one was the wiser that anything happened to the system until our Operations department realized that node was down. We were able to repair the server and bring it back up without causing issues on the database. Which meant the application was also still up, which we were very happy with. I didn't like it when used with Hyper-V to setup a cluster, although it allowed us to set it up similar to a VMWare cluster, I did not like having to go between the Windows Failover Clustering manager then the Hyper-V manager to work on a VM. It also caused a small issue when one of my colleagues setup a VM, he forgot to add Windows Failover Cluster.
We have Hyper-V implemented as our primary hypervisor and we have also implemented failover clustering with cluster storage and multipath IO to mitigate node failure without impacting our work loads, in case of cluster node failure it seamlessly migrates workloads to other hypervisors without any downtime, the other benefit is that when we are updating hypervisors we live migrate virtual machines to different nodes in same cluster and restart one by one that results in no downtime and hassle free operation. it simply made management of virtual machines simpler and improved overall uptime of our infrastructure.
Pros
Seamless Live Migrations
Quick Migrations
Failover in case of Node Failure
Storage Migration
Cons
Shared nothing live migration need some improvements.
Cluster events are not very understandable.
Cluster validation.
Likelihood to Recommend
I have observed while moving multiple virtual machines failover cluster starts slowing down, so we move a maximum of two live migrations at a time, but quick migration is far faster. We used it for replicas and noncritical workloads. Windows Server Failover Clustering is very well suited for small to medium-sized organizations, i.e. its good for a few hundred virtual machines. The features present in failover clustering are getting better with each iteration.
VU
Verified User
Professional in Information Technology (1001-5000 employees)
We have Setup Windows Server Failover Clustering for our SQL Server Always On so that our databases are configured on Failover mode. In case any of our servers failing to respond this service will move our databases from the primary server to the disaster recovery server. Our Information technology department uses it and the user across the organization is not aware of what we have deployed or what is our architecture.
Pros
Failover Priority setting , i.e. High, medium , low.
online services movement.
Online data movement across clusters.
No downtime,
Easy role movement
Cons
Quorum settings should be improved
San environment should be improved
Logging of Cluster events should be improved
Likelihood to Recommend
SQL Server in always-on mode is the best suitable for windows server failover clustering rather than configuring the SQL Server in cluster mode having the same disk and the disk will be moved with all databases, alwaysOn is the best and suitable way to configure it on Failover Clustering as we have two separate disks and database files on the separate servers.
It is the backbone of our IT Infrastructure, It provides high availability of the servers to meet our business requirements, we are using it for failover solution of our exchange servers and database servers, Microsoft is working hard to making it better day by day and with the newer version 2019 we can failover to a cloud or on premises both.
Pros
It is reliable, its fast, it is the best you would not even know that you have been switched to other node.
Clustering based on geographic distribution
Multiple server multiple site deployment
Cons
Configuration could make easier
[I feel] pricing should be considered for middle size organizations to adapt it
Storage pool and VDM configuration is confusing [in my experience]
Likelihood to Recommend
Best for organizations that require 24 hours of enabled IT infrastructure to support business needs so incase of any updating activity or a disaster the user won't even know what had happened at the back and ensure smooth operations. Hot plug scalable storage is a good option for organizations using RDBMS and thin clients as well.
VU
Verified User
Employee in Information Technology (1001-5000 employees)
At our organization, we use Windows Server Failover Clustering to keep our Azure DevOps Server environment in a high-availability state for our end users. Both the application tier and the SQL tier are clustered so that if there is a network fault or outage, the system will fail-over to the other server node, and the user can continue to work without knowing the server was down.
Pros
Works great with SQL Server clustering
Highly configurable, but simple and intuitive
Cluster events are shown in the tool (No need to go to the Windows Event Logs)
Cons
Would be nice if the tool had built-in alerts for when a fail-over occurred
Only one network card on a node in the same network
Likelihood to Recommend
Windows Server Failover Clustering is well suited for organizations that need to have systems running in a high-availability mode. If there are systems that would pose a high cost to the business if there is downtime due to unplanned events, then Windows Server Failover Clustering will help assure 24/7 uptime. Also, clustering can be helpful for planned events, such as server updates. You can install an upgrade on the inactive node and then fail-over manually, switching the active and inactive nodes, upgrade the other node, and then failback. Also, while I don't have direct experience with this aspect, my understanding is that Windows Server Failover Clustering is also well suited for load balancing VMs.
VU
Verified User
Administrator in Information Technology (1001-5000 employees)
