Share your experience using DxEnterprise

We use IBM PowerHA SystemMirror for high availability and VM protection. It covers scenarios like local node failures or even outages across entire sites. Additionally, it can manage workloads running in a NAS environment, such as Oracle databases or applications. PowerHA operates in an active-passive mode, meaning only one node runs the workload. In case of a primary node failure, PowerHA automatically switches to the secondary node, ensuring continuous operation. If even the secondary node fails, PowerHA can further failover to another active system in a secondary site, providing an additional layer of disaster recovery.

PowerHA is an active solution that addresses customer preferences for active solutions. It possesses the capability to integrate with storage seamlessly. During failovers or site switches, PowerHA integrates the storage and ensures the transition of your applications. This functionality effectively manages the process. Another crucial feature is its ability to control the startup sequence for multiple resource groups. It determines the order in which nodes and services should start, ensuring a systematic and orderly startup process. Additionally, PowerHA offers monitoring capabilities to restart any processes that may have been terminated automatically, eliminating the need for user intervention. 

In terms of interoperability and compatibility, every time new applications and database levels are released, a thorough compatibility check is conducted in PowerHA. IBM consistently ensures compatibility, especially in the open systems environment and within the Unix platform, where software compatibility challenges are prevalent.

Regarding components controlled under PowerHA, IBM occasionally must address compatibility issues by providing fixes and releases. Despite this, the product exhibits stability. However, the main issue arises when components are updated, requiring IBM to release corresponding fixes. This process may take some time, but it is routinely addressed.

Regarding product stability, PowerHA is generally reliable, with the only notable challenge being the need for fixes during component updates. It would be beneficial if the software had options for controlling and implementing an active-active setup, although PowerHA is primarily designed for active-passive configurations.

I have been using IBM PowerHA System Mirror for ten years. We are using the version AIX 7.1 of the solution.

The product is stable.

The solution is scalable.

If you try to reach IBM support, particularly from Russia or surrounding regions such as Malaysia, you usually get into a problem. However, the support from the United States and Germany is typically reliable. Therefore, the quality of support depends on the specific region from which assistance is sought.

The initial setup is easy.

IBM PowerHA offers multiple editions. You can choose between the base, enterprise, or standard edition. If you intend to use it for purposes other than just ratio and not for HDR, and if you require features like storage control and internet connectivity, the enterprise version is recommended. IBM has a distinct price structure for each software version—basic, standard, advanced, or enterprise. It is quite competitive in the market.

Based on the customer's environment, we tailor a solution for them. The suitability of the solution depends on the IBM environment. If they have an independent ISP, we provide them with PowerHA tailored to their needs.

Ultimately, the choice is based on their environment and licensing. If they intend to use PowerHA for a resilient setup in a React environment with multiple servers and can afford secondary hardware on the same site for physical redundancy, I recommend opting for PowerHA. It is a thoroughly tested and certified product that operates seamlessly.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for warehouse purposes. We built an SQL server on the solution.

The solution has a hot-swap feature. If one of the servers fails, we’ll still have a running system. It takes a few seconds to swap to the other server. The system has no interruption and is highly available.

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. It's not easy to set up or monitor its status.

I have been using Windows Server Failover Clustering as a partner for five years. We are using the latest version of the solution.

I rate the solution’s stability a seven out of ten.

More than 100 users are using the solution. We cater the solution to medium to large businesses.
I rate the solution’s scalability a six out of ten.

Technical support is fine.

Positive

The initial setup takes a few hours and needs some knowledge to complete. You had to prepare hardware, do the prerequisites on the operation system, and install it.

I rate the initial setup a five out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

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.

If you have a budget, keeping the solution for data safety is better.
Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.