Red Hat Virtualization vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Red Hat Virtualization (RHV)
Score 6.3 out of 10
N/A
Red Hat Virtualization (formerly Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization, broadly known as RHEV) is an enterprise level server and desktop virtualization solution. Red Hat Virtualization also contains the functionality of Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization for Desktop in later editions of the platform.
$999
Per Year Per Hypervisor
Windows Server Failover Clustering
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
Windows Server Failover Clustering (WSFC) is a group of independent servers that work together to increase application and service availability.N/A
Pricing
Red Hat VirtualizationWindows Server Failover Clustering
Editions & Modules
Standard
$999.00
Per Year Per Hypervisor
Premium
$1,499.00
Per Year Per Hypervisor
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Red Hat Virtualization (RHV)Windows Server Failover Clustering
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Red Hat VirtualizationWindows Server Failover Clustering
Features
Red Hat VirtualizationWindows Server Failover Clustering
Server Virtualization
Comparison of Server Virtualization features of Product A and Product B
Red Hat Virtualization
7.7
10 Ratings
5% below category average
Windows Server Failover Clustering
-
Ratings
Virtual machine automated provisioning7.910 Ratings00 Ratings
Management console7.310 Ratings00 Ratings
Live virtual machine backup7.29 Ratings00 Ratings
Live virtual machine migration6.910 Ratings00 Ratings
Hypervisor-level security8.99 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Red Hat VirtualizationWindows Server Failover Clustering
Small Businesses
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 9.3 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
Score 10.0 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Enterprises
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
VMware vSOM (discontinued)
Score 10.0 out of 10

No answers on this topic

All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Red Hat VirtualizationWindows Server Failover Clustering
Likelihood to Recommend
6.6
(11 ratings)
10.0
(12 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(3 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(3 ratings)
User Testimonials
Red Hat VirtualizationWindows Server Failover Clustering
Likelihood to Recommend
Red Hat
RHEV is well suited for organizations that need a cost-effective and flexible solution for their environment. As its vendor-independent software, easily install on any type of hardware. RHEV provides a GUI interface to manage the software, which makes the management of the software easier for the end-user. RHEV is best for non-production or less critical applications. RHEV can be easily integrated with other REDHAT software.
Read full review
Microsoft
Windows ServerFailover Clustering works very well for applications that can sustain a short disconnect when failing over. It works, and works well, in providing single-node applications HA, meaning an active/passive setup. It is not a load balancing solution. Use NLB for that. Another area that it works well is when used in combination with Hyper-V. We set our Hyper-V hosts up as clusters, and those clusters also host clusters for SQL Server and other enterprise class applications like BMC's Control-M/Enterprise and Control-M/Server.
Read full review
Pros
Red Hat
  • RHV issues/bugs can be reported via Bugzilla to RH support. The service is great and typically responds soon.
  • Red Hat distribution integration is seamless as it is integrated into the kernel.
  • OpenStack support enables more customized VM templates and network configuration control.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Live Migration of VMs between hosts. If you have sufficient network bandwidth, it is fast and I never had a failed live migration break the VM or kill it. Worst case is the live migration will fail (not enough RAM for example) but the VM always stayed up.
  • Windows Server Failover Clustering enables Scaleout Storage, which is probably the coolest feature Microsoft has to offer at this moment. It gives you Active-Active SMB file shares which can now be used by most Microsoft Services like MS SQL, Hyper-V, etc. and clients if Windows 8+
  • Cluster Validation is really complete and easy to understand. The validation gives you comprehensive error messages that help to diagnose and fix rapidly to get your Failover Cluster running in no time.
Read full review
Cons
Red Hat
  • 1- RHVM API is pretty slow, especially after creating a VM it is not possible to retrieve the VM details (i.e VM's MAC Address) fast enough, where we need to place a pause in our Ansible Playbook, make the automation process slow.
  • 2- RHV is still using collected to monitor the hypervisors which is deviating from Red Hat policy for other RHEL based applications to use PCP to monitor, which is richer in features.
  • 3- It will be great if it is possible to patch the hypervisors using other tools such as satellite and not only via RHVM.
  • 4- In the past Red Hat used to present patches in the z release (i.e. 4.3.z), and features in the y release (i.e 4. y), but starting from 4.4 that is mixed together wherein the Z release you get both patches and features, that is not good because that requires a lot of time to test when we patch as it includes features as well.
  • 5- Engineering team has to be more reactive when new feature is requested.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • 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.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Red Hat
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
It has proven its value to us both for maintaining SLAs and providing the ability to perform much needed and regular systems maintenance without taking applications offline for more than a few seconds.
Read full review
Usability
Red Hat
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
Usability of Failover Clustering on Windows Server is generally good. Failover Clustering console is not hard to understand if the complexity of the product is taken into account. Most of the task on the Cluster can be done via PowerShell, so automation is possible and not hard (PowerShell is very intuitive). Configuring storage is the hardest and most confusing task during cluster configuration, so storage configuration should be planned in advance. Cluster Validation Wizard is verbose but most of the errors are easy to understand.
Read full review
Support Rating
Red Hat
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
Online documentation is excellent. Everything I needed to know, I learned from the online documentation. I haven't used phone support as I haven't needed to but would presume it is similar to Microsoft Support for other products that I've used. Phone support from Microsoft is hit and miss. It depends on who you get. That said, my rating is based on the online documentation.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Red Hat
RHEV is an excellent product, includes more features, is less expensive, and has rock solid reliability and is backed with the best Red Hat Support in the industry. RHEV uses KVM under the hood which is used by all the big players in the industry (AWS, Rackspace, etc) to lower their overall costs and improve efficiency and profits and that's why RHEV is an excellent solution!
Read full review
Microsoft
Both VMware and Microsoft Failover do the job and they both do it extremely well. For many bussiness and environments though, they will have the existing investment in a Microsoft environment and Microsoft infrastructure. The introduction of VMware will or may achieve the end result however it introduces new dimensions like support, licensing, documentation and ensuring the support team are trained.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Red Hat
  • RHEV has provided a positive ROI as our customers are not experiencing as many outages during maintenances.
  • We have not experienced any catastrophic failures as a result of vsphere losing connection to the ntp.
  • There has been a level of stability in our environment that was not previously experienced with our previous vendor.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Failover Cluster gives us the power to do updates or hardware upgrade / change without having to create an outage. Which permit us not to work night shifts.
  • By creating one cluster with all Hyper-V servers, it enabled us to move VMs via live migration between host to balance RAM usage which was time consuming and took a lot of time over network before.
  • It created some problems that caused us to have to investigate quite some time before finding the cause. We encountered dll locking that caused the Failover Cluster to force-restart a host. Logs are really not the strong point of Failover Cluster Manager, and even Microsoft Support wasn't able to help much. We had to find the problem ourself.
Read full review
ScreenShots