HPE Storage Users Group

(French speaking)
Your opinion from the field :

I’m going to replace an existing CLX Physical Windows Server Failover Cluster(WSFC) 2008 R2/SQL 2012 Failover Cluster Instance with new physical Windows Sever 2016/SQL 2016

Back 5 years ago, CLX was the choice for our need.

Now, with Peer Persistence, CLX is not the only way

We use Peer Persistence for other VMWare Metro Cluster need from the beginning, it work very smoothly, ease setting etc.

But what is your choice/reason between CLX and Peer Persistence for a Windows failover Cluster with a FCI SQL 2016(100 database, 512gb each of SQL filestream by server pair)

HW: 2X7400 3.2.2 MU3
Please if you don’t use this technology in the real world…your opinion is only theoretical, it's no what i ask for…

Thanks!

Positives:

PP:
transparent failover on storage
Doesn't require any software installed on the hosts (CLX5 and 3PAR OS 3.3.1 has improved this, but still require CLX client but no CLI)
Can run storage at one site and compute on the other

CLX
Site aware (storage is always online on the same site as compute)
DB admin "controls" storage thru known interfaces.
Supports async/periodic replication.

_________________
The views and opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my current or previous employers.