Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

DRBD vs Windows Server Failover Clustering comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

DRBD
Ranking in High Availability Clustering
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Windows Server Failover Clu...
Ranking in High Availability Clustering
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the High Availability Clustering category, the mindshare of DRBD is 11.9%, up from 11.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Windows Server Failover Clustering is 28.1%, down from 35.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
High Availability Clustering
 

Featured Reviews

it_user302112 - PeerSpot reviewer
It's kept data synchronized between multiple nodes in different datacenters, though it should have its own filesystem which can be used in multi-master environments.
Working with DRBD can be complex and it takes time to understand how it works. Especially split-brain scenarios need to be handled carefully. When it comes to multi-master setups, which are possible with the latest DRBD version, you need to use a cluster filesystem. I think that DRBD should write their own filesystem which can be used in multi-master environments since most cluster filesystems are complex or simply have many flaws.
MR
Useful ISS, good support, and simple implementation
There are times when we do the system security updates and have to restart the server which is difficult because we need to wait until the end of the day or when working hours are finished. There are service updates that have a requirement to restart the system and it is not convenient. In a feature release, there should be a feature to allow applications to be developed on the web portal and better databases that we can run.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which High Availability Clustering solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Windows Server Failover Clustering?
There is no extra charge except a service fee for some professional work. I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with Windows Server Failover Clustering?
The solution uses external storage, while third-party solutions don't use external storage. They're using a mirror to create a partition on each server and synchronize the data in the background. I...
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Portland State University, Porsche Informatik, Siemens, Ericsson,T-Mobile, Addidas
Karl-Franzens-Universit_t Graz, NAV CANADA, Magnachip, ólectricit_ de France, Cambridgeshire Constabulary, Bank Alfalah Ltd., Local Government Association of Queensland
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, IBM, Veritas and others in High Availability Clustering. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.