So we have primarily been a Hyper-V shop but I'm looking into the vSphere option. I have experience with ESXi but not a lot on the clustering side. If I'm interupting the documentation I'm reading correctly I'm seeing (what I consider) a HUGE downfall for vSphere when pitted against Hyper-V R2.
In a Hyper-V R2 cluster if a hardware node fails, the VM will be live migrated to an available node. No downtime, application stays up. The VM being failed over can have 1 vCPU or 4 vCPU's assigned. It doesn't matter.
On the vSphere side of things, if you have a VM with a decent load and need more than 1 vCPU you can not use FT. HA is your only option, and in that case the VM actually has go offline and then be re-started on the new node.
Am I unerstaning this right? Considering how mature vSphere is compared to Hyper-V I'm really surprised by this.
In a Hyper-V R2 cluster if a hardware node fails, the VM will be live migrated to an available node. No downtime, application stays up. The VM being failed over can have 1 vCPU or 4 vCPU's assigned. It doesn't matter.
On the vSphere side of things, if you have a VM with a decent load and need more than 1 vCPU you can not use FT. HA is your only option, and in that case the VM actually has go offline and then be re-started on the new node.
Am I unerstaning this right? Considering how mature vSphere is compared to Hyper-V I'm really surprised by this.