SIOS SANless clusters

SIOS SANless clusters High-availability Machine Learning monitoring

Is Vmware’s Vsphere Disaster Recovery Options Really The Better One?

by Leave a Comment

Are Vmware’s Vsphere Disaster Recovery Options Really Better Than Microsoft’s Options For Hyper-V?

Every article I read about virtualization and disaster recovery says VMware has a more robust DR solution than Microsoft. Well, I’d like to challenge that assumption. From the view where I sit, this is actually one of the areas where Microsoft has a major competitive advantage at the moment. Here is how I see it.

VMware Site Recovery Manager

This is an optional additional add on that rides on the back of Array based replication solutions. The recovery point objective is good due to the array based replication. The RTO is measured in hours, not minutes. Add in the fact that moving back to the primary data center is a very manual procedure. It basically requires that you re-create your jobs in the opposite direction. The complete end to end recovery operation of failover and failback could take the better part of a day or longer.

Microsoft Multi-Site Cluster

Virtual machine HA clustering is included with the free version of Hyper-V Server 2008 R2, as well as with Windows Server 2008 Enterprise and Datacenter editions. In order to do multi-site clusters, it requires array based replication or host based replication solutions that integrate with Windows Server Failover Clustering. With a multi-site cluster, failover is measured in minutes (just about the time it takes to start a VM) and can be used with array based replication solutions such as EMC SRDF CE or HP MSA CLX or the much less expensive host based replication solutions such as SteelEye DataKeeper Cluster Edition.

Not only is failover quick with Hyper-V multi-site clusters, measured in just a few minutes. Failback is also quick and seamless as well. Add in support for Live Migrations or Quick Migration across Data Centers. I think this is one area that Microsoft actually has a much more robust solution than VMware Vsphere Disaster Recovery Options. Maybe it does not included automated DR tests, but when you consider you can failover and failback all in under 10 minutes, maybe an actual DR test performed monthly would give you a much better indication of what to expect in an actual disaster?

If you want a Hyper-V solution more like SRM, then there is an option there as well. It is called Citrix Essential for Hyper-V. But much like SRM, it is an optional add-on feature. It really doesn’t even match the RPO and RTO features that you can achieve with basic multi-site clusters for Hyper-V.

What do you think? Am I wrong or is there something I just don’t get? From my view, Hyper-V is heads and shoulders above Vsphere Disaster Recovery Options. 

Reproduced with permission by https://clusteringformeremortals.com/2010/03/10/are-vmware%E2%80%99s-vsphere-disaster-recovery-options-really-better-than-microsoft%E2%80%99s-options-for-hyper-v/

Microsoft End-To-End Cross-Site Disaster Recovery Solution

by Leave a Comment

Cross-Site Disaster Recovery Solution

Microsoft has recently updated their Virtualization Continuity page with some good information.

Implementing a reliable, rapid-recovery strategy can be time-consuming to implement and expensive to manage. Due to the complexity and cost, many companies simply don’t have comprehensive business continuity plans to protect their data and ensure application availability.

Virtualization has been a game changer for many companies. With virtualization based Site Recovery solutions, you can ensure higher availability and business continuity options. Windows Server provides support for a wide range of industry leading, shared storage solutions to deliver Quick and Live Migration. Combined with partner cross-site data management and replication technologies, Microsoft is offering complete Cross-Site Disaster Recovery Solution

In summary, Microsoft Site Recovery solutions provide these key benefits:

  • Bullet proof application and data availability across a range of applications
  • Site-wide disaster recovery that can help you gain immediate and long-term operational and capital benefits
  • Automated fail-over and fail back based on clustering and data resynchronization delivering superior application and data availability, for planned and unplanned downtime

Also, they have recently published a white paper entitled “Microsoft End-to-End Cross-Site Disaster Recovery Solutions“. This is a must read for anyone deploying SteelEye DataKeeper in a Cross-Site Disaster Recovery configuration.

Reproduced with permission from https://clusteringformeremortals.com/2009/12/22/microsoft-end-to-end-cross-site-disaster-recovery-solution/

The Difference Between Hyper-V Live Migration And Quick Migration

by Leave a Comment

With the launch of Windows Server 2008 R2 and the interest in DataKeeper replication solutions for Hyper-V, I have been pretty busy – which is a good thing! Recently, I have been speaking with some Microsoft Gold Partners who are busy installing Hyper-V at their customer locations and looking at some of the disaster recovery options, including multi-site Hyper-V clusters with SteelEye DataKeeper Cluster Edition. Many of the questions are the same each time and the demonstration is always the same. I figured it may be beneficial to produce a video that talks specifically about one of the questions – the difference between Live Migration and Quick Migration and when to use one vs. the other. This video that demonstrates Live Migration and Quick Migration while discussing some of the things to consider may be of interest to you.