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

HPE Serviceguard vs Veritas InfoScale Availability 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the High Availability Clustering category, the mindshare of HPE Serviceguard is 15.3%, up from 12.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veritas InfoScale Availability is 27.9%, up from 20.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Windows Server Failover Clustering is 24.4%, down from 33.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
High Availability Clustering
 

Featured Reviews

AH
The solution's most valuable feature is the ability to create a Mount Point Package
They should continue with the certificate for the consequent year as well. They must keep the product up and running for a long time as it is currently static. There are a lot of challenges as well. Sometimes, the mount point gets lost depending on link failure or census problems. The solution works on a standard script, but it has many tech issues to fix with the OS. You have to keep checking network connectivity, OS connectivity, etc. If any of these fails, then you do not get the certificate.
it_user281973 - PeerSpot reviewer
It provides a stable SAP environment, but deployment does require someone with experience.
It offers High Availability for many applications, including Oracle and SAP environment In my last job, it provided a great SAP environment that was stable and running on Veritas Cluster. I've used it for six years. It's not so easy in some cases, and you will need some experience. There were…
SK
A scalable solution to create clusters, and auto-assign a master
The solution has some downsides related to the election mechanism, meaning that if the servers or the cluster services or cluster server elect one server, they will attribute to that server an object that is called a quorum. This quorum does the server or the service that has that quorum, it is taken as the master. So when you have, for example, something happens in your data centers like a power outage or an unexpected shutdown, and you can't start the master server what sometimes will happen, is since the shutdown was unexpected, the cluster didn't have time to do some post configurations before the extension of the shutdown of the servers, sometimes that quorum can't be removed from the crashed master and the cluster wants stuff. This is part of the architecture of this service, the Failover service. So sometimes we face this type of problem. In the past, we had a lot of power outages and when we started after, our server, we faced this problem. Meaning that the cluster won't stop because one of the servers, the master crashed, and they didn't want to start. So we need to access and do some line configurations so that we will force the cluster to elect a new master and ignore the crashed one.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"HPE Serviceguard is stable, it has high availability for production."
"The solution's scalability is excellent."
"It integrates well with other solutions."
"The solution switches over to another server in case the server goes down."
"The reliability is pretty good."
"Some of the advantages, are it can give you the ability to choose."
"The most valuable features of Windows Server Failover Clustering are the ISS, failover cluster, and DC."
"The product is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to easily create clusters supporting geo-redundancy."
 

Cons

"They must keep the product up and running for a long time as it is currently static."
"Many customers want virtualization or high availability but not on HPE Serviceguard with the appliance."
"It could be more stable and more secure."
"They could drop the price or improve the cost of the hyper-converged component of it all. Right now, licensing is expensive and complex."
"The tool's pricing is high."
"The product should be less dependent on network configuration."
"The standard, non-enterprise technical support could be improved."
"The stability is good, except for when something crashes or shuts down unexpectedly, then it can be a bit difficult to reestablish the service in a stable state."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is available at a high price. I rate it as a two for pricing."
"Our clients pay for licensing on a yearly basis."
"The functionality is included in Windows Server licences."
"So if you acquire the Windows server license, you will also get all of the Windows services licenses."
"I would rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"We are on an annual license to use this solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which High Availability Clustering solutions are best for your needs.
865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Retailer
9%
Real Estate/Law Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
8%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 ...
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...
What is your primary use case for Windows Server Failover Clustering?
We use the solution for warehouse purposes. We built an SQL server on the solution.
 

Also Known As

Serviceguard, HP Serviceguard
InfoScale Availability, Veritas Cluster Server (VCS), Veritas InfoScale
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RI-Solution, FAW-Volkswagen, Pella, Octo Telematics, Kenya Ports Authority
Wayne State University, Zenith Mart
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: August 2025.
865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.