Windows Server Review

Replacing our physical servers provides HA and is less prone to hardware failure

What is our primary use case?

We started virtualizing servers to reduce the number of physical servers and to optimize the data center. We started with standalone installations of the Hyper-V server and synchronized with our virtual machine. After that, we built a cluster and all of the VMs were hosted in that environment.

How has it helped my organization?

The organization spent a lot of money buying a large number of physical machines, which made up the workspace. With a physical machine, it is easy to incur damage with hardware faults, such as the loss of a disk or another component. With a cluster environment, we obtain an HA solution.

What is most valuable?

We like all of the features connected with sharing resources, typical of a Hyper-V cluster manager. Several of these further stand out, including:

  • The ability to Hot Add resources to the VM.
  • The ability to work on the physical server without disconnecting services.
  • Provides workspaces for the entire organization with fewer resources.

What needs improvement?

One area that needs improvement is the management console. It seems very easy to use but it is not as powerful as those of other vendors, such as VMware. Their solution allows for operation in a more granular and simpler way. For example, there is a wizard to migrate a VM from one node to another, or from one datastore to another.

For how long have I used the solution?

Six years.
**Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
More Windows Server reviews from users
...who work at a Financial Services Firm
...who compared it with Ubuntu Linux
Add a Comment