Good morning, everyone! I'm planning to set up a two-node cluster using Hyper-V along with a quorum device for high availability and replication. I'm trying to decide whether to go with NAS storage or stick to local storage using S2D on the servers. Any advice on what might be better?
2 Answers
It really depends on your budget and what your disk throughput requirements are for your workload. For smaller business scenarios, S2D generally works just fine. I've set up several Hyper-V clusters using both S2D and iSCSI SAN, and I've also dealt with VMware clusters using vSAN, NFS, and iSCSI SAN. Each option has its pros and cons.
I switched from using SAN to S2D for my storage needs, and honestly, I kind of regret it. S2D works well most of the time but it does have some quirks and odd issues. My old Nimble setup was rock solid for five straight years without any downtime. Just something to consider if you're looking for reliability!
Related Questions
Can't Load PhpMyadmin On After Server Update
Redirect www to non-www in Apache Conf
How To Check If Your SSL Cert Is SHA 1
Windows TrackPad Gestures