StarWind Virtual SAN pros and cons

The install itself is easy as pie.

The solution is also quite flexible. As an example, other vSAN solutions that we looked at had more stringent requirements regarding mixed HDD/SSD storage which wouldn't have worked in our environment.

With an uptime of 384 days, StarWind has improved overall server reliability.

The fact that we can expand our storage and add on to our compute nodes easily and how amazing the StarWind technical support team is really adding value to our purchase.

We are running Hyper-V on twin servers in failover, and being able to manage servers from anywhere I need to, virtually, has been a game changer.

The StarWind Virtual SAN provides a clever and unique solution to the Computing Split Brain problem.

It has been extremely stable for the three years we've been running it.

Besides being 80% cheaper than the other alternatives, the simplicity makes reconfiguration and support much easier.

The ROI is great on this product.

It has allowed us to save a lot of time and money by letting us create a vSAN within a Windows VM on the environment it controls.

Feature-wise we are only waiting for the release of a "planned disaster" feature that would allow us to patch a hypervisor node without having to take the full storage offline.

The main thing I would like to see improved is the level of documentation.

While we had little to no issues in setting up StarWind and received excellent support from the StarWind technicians, we would have appreciated a clearer guideline for a setup with the free version of StarWind Management Console or, in other words - for the setup with the PowerShell.

We don't really have any issues with this product.

I'd love to see more clarification for us folks who are smart enough to do some damage yet not smart enough to use CLI.

I would like them to invest time in reducing the complexity of the startup and shutdown procedure.

I would definitely like to see quite a bit more on the monitoring side of things.

A web management interface would be good, especially for those coming from other solutions that have one.

The documentation is good yet is still lacking in a few areas.

It would be good to have a little more access to control certain aspects within the UI.