Your Browser is Out of Date

Nytro.ai uses technology that works best in other browsers.
For a full experience use one of the browsers below
Tech Book—Dell Integrated System For Microsoft Azure Stack HCI
Preface Business Transformation and Data Center Modernization Evolution of Data Centers to HCI and Hybrid Cloud A Closer Look at Microsoft Azure Stack HCI Azure Stack HCI Architecture and Building Blocks Dell Integrated System for Microsoft Azure Stack HCI Portfolio – AX Nodes Networking Topologies for Azure Stack HCI Solutions Stretch Clustering with Azure Stack HCI
Stretch Clustering with Azure Stack HCI
Azure Stack HCI stretch clustering
Comparison of traditional and stretched clusters
Business continuity planning
Stretch clustering topology
Servers Storage pools Volumes Setup configuration Preferred site configuration Affinity and anti-affinity VMs Cloud witness
Azure Stack HCI stretch clustering scenarios and concepts
Active/passive setup Active/Active Synchronous replication Asynchronous replication
Stretch clustering best practices with Azure Stack HCI
Validated network topology
Basic configuration High throughput configuration Server and site affinity rules for VMs
Managing the Hybrid Cloud Sizing and Configuration Best Practices Dell Support and Services Conclusion Additional Resources

Comparison of traditional and stretched clusters

Home > Integrated Products > Microsoft HCI Solutions from Dell Technologies > Guides 22H2 and earlier > Tech Book—Dell Integrated System For Microsoft Azure Stack HCI > Comparison of traditional and stretched clusters

Comparison of traditional and stretched clusters

  • Stretch clustering with Azure Stack HCI offers great benefits for certain workloads. The following table provides a brief summary for how an organization can benefit from stretch clusters when compared to traditional clusters.

    In a traditional cluster, we have the option to create a 2 or 3-way mirror confined to a single site. By contrast, in a stretched cluster each volume on the primary site will require a replica volume on the secondary site and log volumes on both sites. This has profound implications on storage efficiency and performance as we end up with 4x to 6x data resiliency for the data across the two sites.

    Table 2. Traditional cluster compared to stretched cluster
    Traditional Stretched Cluster
    Single Site Two sites
    Site failure will cause complete outage VMs restart on secondary site in case of site outage - Automated failover
    Single Storage Pool Two Storage Pools
    2x to 3x data resiliency 4x to 6x data resiliency
    No performance impact

    Performance impact can occur due to inter-site throughput and latency

    Additional writes to volumes and their respective log volumes on secondary site can cause overhead

    Complete data loss in case of a calamity

    Zero data loss for synchronous replication

    Based on RPO for asynchronous