My work focused on a high-availability environment where customers maintained two or three data centers designed for disaster recovery solutions. I managed local clusters as well as global clusters, and when a service failed in a particular environment, it automatically moved to a different region. The entire solution was designed with InfoScale at its core. I find InfoScale's automated Stack Aware Recovery feature to be very beneficial when recovering from ransomware events. The system automatically moved services to alternate nodes, behavior I observed while running on UNIX systems that had underlying issues. Veritas was very active and proactive, notifying me in advance about cluster conditions and recommended actions. From a recovery perspective, my main goal was to establish application recovery, which is why I selected this solution. Some critical machines in the environment still run Veritas because it excels at recovery, is easy to understand, and facilitates root cause analysis. Most of the root cause analyses I performed over ten years were not related to Veritas. I consider it a great product that meets expectations. The primary concern is licensing cost, as the customer is unwilling to invest further and has begun cost-cutting measures. With cloud adoption, they are moving workloads to the cloud, believing it offers greater benefits than on-premises solutions. All VCS instances and Veritas clusters ran on-premises only, with nothing moved to the cloud. Most licenses have already expired, and the customer has allowed me to continue using them while exploring alternative solutions. The application team is redesigning applications from scratch, with several already migrated to microservice architecture in Kubernetes in the cloud. From a recovery standpoint, InfoScale is excellent and easy to manage. A single technical person can handle 100 machines or one application spanning multiple clusters. I utilized the Virtual Business Services feature to design the solution, enabling all databases, frontend machines, backend machines, and related components to move to different clusters seamlessly without any issues. InfoScale has significantly reduced downtime for my customer. I encountered unusual split-brain issues. Because I did not utilize all cluster features such as I/O Fencing, which requires additional setup and licensing cost, the solution was not designed with I/O Fencing. When split-brain occurred, I had to investigate the cause, protect the data, and determine remediation steps. For data protection, I implemented SCSI-3 Persistent Reserve at the storage level instead of using I/O Fencing.
Presales Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Reseller
May 31, 2021
The use case depends on the client's needs. They have three different components in InfoScale. They have availability, Cluster Server, and the Cluster File System.
Find out what your peers are saying about InfoScale, Microsoft, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in High Availability Clustering. Updated: March 2026.
High Availability Clustering ensures continuous service availability by distributing workloads across multiple servers. This technology prevents downtime by enabling failover capabilities, which automatically switch tasks to operational servers if one fails.
High Availability Clustering is essential for organizations looking to maintain uninterrupted services. It uses multiple servers that work together, enhancing system reliability and performance. During a server failure, workloads...
My work focused on a high-availability environment where customers maintained two or three data centers designed for disaster recovery solutions. I managed local clusters as well as global clusters, and when a service failed in a particular environment, it automatically moved to a different region. The entire solution was designed with InfoScale at its core. I find InfoScale's automated Stack Aware Recovery feature to be very beneficial when recovering from ransomware events. The system automatically moved services to alternate nodes, behavior I observed while running on UNIX systems that had underlying issues. Veritas was very active and proactive, notifying me in advance about cluster conditions and recommended actions. From a recovery perspective, my main goal was to establish application recovery, which is why I selected this solution. Some critical machines in the environment still run Veritas because it excels at recovery, is easy to understand, and facilitates root cause analysis. Most of the root cause analyses I performed over ten years were not related to Veritas. I consider it a great product that meets expectations. The primary concern is licensing cost, as the customer is unwilling to invest further and has begun cost-cutting measures. With cloud adoption, they are moving workloads to the cloud, believing it offers greater benefits than on-premises solutions. All VCS instances and Veritas clusters ran on-premises only, with nothing moved to the cloud. Most licenses have already expired, and the customer has allowed me to continue using them while exploring alternative solutions. The application team is redesigning applications from scratch, with several already migrated to microservice architecture in Kubernetes in the cloud. From a recovery standpoint, InfoScale is excellent and easy to manage. A single technical person can handle 100 machines or one application spanning multiple clusters. I utilized the Virtual Business Services feature to design the solution, enabling all databases, frontend machines, backend machines, and related components to move to different clusters seamlessly without any issues. InfoScale has significantly reduced downtime for my customer. I encountered unusual split-brain issues. Because I did not utilize all cluster features such as I/O Fencing, which requires additional setup and licensing cost, the solution was not designed with I/O Fencing. When split-brain occurred, I had to investigate the cause, protect the data, and determine remediation steps. For data protection, I implemented SCSI-3 Persistent Reserve at the storage level instead of using I/O Fencing.
The use case depends on the client's needs. They have three different components in InfoScale. They have availability, Cluster Server, and the Cluster File System.