StarWind Virtual SAN Reviews

Our use case is for an oil and gas site with 200 ATEX cameras and 30 administrative buildings that have 400 indoor and outdoor cameras. All of the cameras are connected to a VLAN switch in each area. 

All of the switches are connected to the core switch in the data center through a fibre network between buildings. 

We add all cameras to management servers and they are divided to recording servers. There are 30 cameras for each recording server. 

We create a Microsoft failover cluster to achieve redundancy between management servers.

Another use case is to create a storage pool (4TB) to store SQL DB to achieve database stability and make it reachable to each server.

It provides shared storage to multiple hypervisor hosts. Times have changed, however. StarWind Virtual SAN is the “software replaces hardware” for SAN. We have access control and CCTV systems up and running using Microsoft clustering and shared storage

From time to time we face some issues with the storage unit and the whole cluster goes down. We replaced the storage with virtual SAN on both the nodes of each system using StarWind and now the system is more stable and has failover redundancy.

It is easy to use and can monitor system synchronization and check the storage status. StarWind Virtual SAN (VSAN) combines flash and disks of the cluster and forms a virtual shared storage “pool” accessible by all hosts. 

StarWind cuts down virtualization costs and complexity by eliminating the need for physical shared storage (SAN). 

It offers enterprise-level high availability (HA), deployable and easily configured. We get technical support from their team for the implementation software and if we have any issues.

You can maintain and update it with little to no fuss, even the free version is incredibly capable whilst it brings the cost of a Highly Available HCI solution down to a very cost-effective point. 

Having used Starwind Virtual SAN for many years both for clients and for internal systems, it has always done exactly what it set out to do. It provides a cost-effective way to run an HCI storage platform for almost any hypervisor, but it is most effective with Hyper-V. It's simple and easy to use, 

The software monitoring should be web-based to be reachable from any VLAN workstation.

I have been using the solution for five years.

We needed a solution that provided highly available storage via ISCSI, replicating to multiple physical sites synchronously. We needed it to be easy to use, easy to manage, and cost-effective. Ideally, there would be no vendor lock-in or special hardware needing to be purchased. 

We found StarWind, and this 100% solved our problem. We've used StarWind on a pair of nodes populated with a large amount of flash disks. They then are running on dedicated switches for ISCSI back to our Hyper-V hypervisors, as well as utilizing a dedicated sync link for replication across our metro wan. With this, we're able to have real-time replication of our data between multiple sites.

The ease of management of StarWind, compared to other vendors, has made it a top winner for us. Not only is it possible for junior sysadmins to understand it - it's also reliable. It's backed up by time-tested systems, such as MPIO, ZFS, and ISCSI. 

There's no vendor black magic in a StarWind Box. It's just a box that works. By adding the synchronous repped storage, our system is able to keep real-time data in sync for our virtual machines without having to look into application clustering.

The highly available setup and synchronous replication without the need for a quorum node is huge for us. We wanted storage that would sync the replication between two sites as fast as possible. By utilizing StarWind, we were able to set this up quickly, using dedicated connections, and not have to worry about it. 

It works as well as can be expected. In addition, the ability to choose our own hardware and our own vendors for this was hugely beneficial, as we had pre-existing relationships with vendors we wanted to maintain.

The company is going through a changeover in its current product lineup. This has led to looking stuff up via search engines, hitting both the new and old content, which makes answering questions on your own difficult. I also would have preferred it if I had been able to get pricing before contacting them. 

For additional features, I'd love to see native export of metrics (via Prometheus or something of that nature) to allow us to get more metrics available on our existing dashboard software. I'd also like to see a more robust API for controls.

I've used the solution for 12 months.

The stability has been rock solid. We're running it on a KVM hypervisor and have had no issues in the slightest.

Scalability met our needs; however, it would not perform as well if you added more nodes, as you're increasing your replication delta.

Customer service and support have been great for the little time that we've had to talk to them. They are out of Eastern Europe and are obviously on a virtual phone. This can lead to some audio issues, however, nothing stops it.

Positive

Historically, I had used HPE Lefthand for sync rep storage. While it did the job, it was definitely older technology and has been unsettled.

The setup is extremely straightforward. The software is delivered via a template, so rolling it out is like any other VM. Also, the software includes setup support directly with an engineer who is more than willing to answer questions.

We did a combo of both in-house and vendor. We deployed the VM and then had the vendor assist us. I'd rank them a ten out of ten for knowing how their system works and offering various hypervisors access storage.

Our ROI has been difficult to calculate as this was a required purchase.

The cost of this is less than you expect. Since they're selling a software stack, you do need to consider your own hardware costs.

We have gone through the gamut of technologies and examined Linbit, Ceph, non-clustered ZFS, cluster ZFS, HPE Nimble, Pure, and more.

On-premises

I work as a Senior Systems Administrator at a mid-sized company in the financial services industry.

The single sign-on capabilities have been a huge time saver for our users. The multi-factor authentication also adds a much-needed layer of security, especially with so many people working remotely these days. The centralized management is great. Being able to manage user access and permissions from one place simplifies things considerably. The integration with other Microsoft products is also a plus.

Initially, there was a bit of a learning curve for some of our users, but Microsoft's documentation was helpful. Also, the pricing can be a bit complex depending on the features you need.

We used a previous identity and access management solution before Azure Active Directory. Azure AD is much more user-friendly and has a better integration with our existing infrastructure.

Also, the pricing can be a bit complex depending on the features you need.

Overall, I would recommend Azure Active Directory to other companies. It’s been a valuable addition to our IT infrastructure.

Other

Our primary use case for StarWind Virtual SAN is to repurpose older servers with substantial disk capacity for use in a three-node vSphere cluster. This setup was for proof of concept (POC) environments for the first time and after to host production workloads.

It allows us to create scalable and cost-effective virtual storage solutions. The integration with vSphere ensures that we can efficiently manage and utilize these resources, enhancing our IT infrastructure while minimizing new hardware and licensing costs.

StarWind Virtual SAN has greatly benefited our organization by reducing hardware and licensing costs through repurposing older servers with significant disk capacity. It has enabled us to extend the lifespan of our existing hardware and align with sustainability goals, all while providing a cost-effective and scalable storage solution. Its seamless integration with vSphere has improved our storage management and operational efficiency in production environments.

It was our first two steps to a hyper-converged solution.

The most valuable features of StarWind Virtual SAN include its cost-effective repurposing of older hardware, seamless integration with vSphere, and high scalability. It enables us to extend the lifespan of existing servers, significantly cut down on licensing costs, and manage our storage environment efficiently. 

Additionally, its flexibility allows us to scale effortlessly by adding nodes (up to 32), which supports our growing storage needs and enhances the adaptability of our production environment.

Areas for improvement in StarWind Virtual SAN include simplifying the setup process, especially for users with limited vSphere expertise. Future releases could benefit from an enhanced configuration wizard to streamline deployment and more robust data migration. There is also a need to address the problem of CentOS's end of life. 

Additionally, incorporating a built-in backup solution would significantly enhance data protection. Improved features for managing and migrating data effectively would further strengthen the product.

I have been using the solution for three years now

The stability of StarWind Virtual SAN is robust. The solution performs reliably with minimal downtime, ensuring consistent operation in production environments. 

In case of the loss of a node, the reconstruction, depending on the amount of data to synchronize, is always made with no data or integrity loss.

However, the reliance on CentOS, introduces potential future stability risks. Despite this, the system has consistently delivered dependable performance and resilience, maintaining stability even under significant workloads.

The solution allows for easy expansion by adding nodes (up to 32), which supports growing storage demands and adapts well to increasing workloads. This flexibility ensures that as our storage needs evolve, we can scale the system efficiently without major reconfiguration or downtime. 

Overall, its scalability is a significant strength, making it a versatile choice for both current and future requirements.

I haven't experienced support since I used the free version. Anyway, I have found plenty of support from StarWind through their forum.

Positive

We did not previously use a different solution. 

It was complex to understand the mechanism of the hyperconverged solution put in place.

The ESXi consumes the virtual disk created by Starwind Vsan from the local disk.
The cabling was not that difficult since I didn't use any for data sync between nodes.

The most difficult part was the usage of PowerShell scripts to create the cluster because the free version doesn't provide a Gui.

The implementation was in-house, in a new data center.

The ROI was excellent because we reused old servers that already had capacity disks.

If you are comfortable with the solution and you feel that you don't need support, you can begin with the free licences for three nodes.

We did not evaluate other options.

On-premises

HCI was set up to host our ERP web apps, domain controller, and phone system.  We are using this in production, staging, and development with around 40 virtual machines. We are using Linux and Windows with VMware as the ESXi host. 

Our main use of StarWind HCI is creating a super-smooth virtualized server setup. It blends tech magic, merging storage, networking, and more into one. We were always running into the issues of needing to add more storage and having to pull down our servers, notify customers of the downtime, etc., however, not anymore.

The solution offers failover protection and the ability to expand storage and nodes with no downtime.  Our customers who use our web apps benefit from nearly zero downtime due to hardware failure, hardware replacement, or upgrades. 

Now we are looking at replicating a similar cluster setup for our firewall, switches, and ISP so we can get nearly 0.00% downtime which I know is not possible, however, with the new HCI setup, it is possible to at least almost get there. 

Their support is by far the best enterprise-level support I have come across.

The failover protection and the ability to expand storage and nodes with no downtime are by far the best physical features we have benefited from. Once we requested help from sales, it was a very easy decision compared to VMware where you get lost among the mess of products and low-trained phone techs.

Their web UI is very basic and that is how it should be. The magic is what their HCI setup does behind the scenes for redundancy and the ability to expand storage without ever having to go offline since another node picks up the storage.

Our company was hoping for deduplication and encryption across HCI. That is currently not supported. They used to have it and was removed. Hopefully, both of these features will be coming in upcoming releases.  

A built-in DR that can be stretched with high latency would be very helpful as well. We were able to purchase VMware 8 for our hosts. It would be nice if they developed their own ESXi OS to compete with VMware as the other options out there are not great. VMware does what it needs, however, their support is not great.

I've been using the solution for one week.

We've had no downtime so far.

You can scale as much as your company will need.

Technical support is good. Somebody is always available 24/7.

Positive

I did not use a different solution.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

We used StarWind in-house support as they do most of the setup before they send it to you.

We've witnessed downtime within two years.

I'd advise new users to have sales walk them through all the options and also ask them about purchasing the hardware for you.

I previously evaluated VMware.

On-premises

I am using it to replace an end-of-life NetApp SAN after moving about half of our storage to the cloud. It is reducing the cost when it comes time to replace existing on-site storage (this was part of the cost justification of moving systems to the cloud but quotes provided by several vendors and consultants for replacement systems were actually more than what we paid for the EOL system six years ago). I was greatly relieved that I was able to deliver on my promise to reduce storage costs by half with StarWind vSAN.

We were able to reduce our on-site storage costs by roughly half what we paid for the previous NetApp SAN six years ago (with no noticeable loss of performance or loss of High Availability). This allowed us to help cost justify the investment we had already made in cloud and Software as a Service (SaaS) offerings with existing vendors without breaking the bank when it came time to replace our end-of-life NetApp SAN. Since only two VMWare ESXi host servers are required, it's allowing us to use local storage; we should also be able to replace the system again the next go around for a similar cost. 

The product only requires two VMWare ESXi host servers versus three host servers for VMware's comparable solution.  

We have detected zero loss of performance and we still have High Availability in place. vSAN has run smoothly with zero issues whatsoever so far.  

It's easy to administer.  

Support has been great with knowledgeable, helpful, and professional engineers responding quickly.  

I had initial concerns there might be a language barrier yet have had zero issues in this area. Communication has been great with both sales and service before and after the sale.

I struggled when bit figuring out how to go about doing the evaluation. It would have been helpful to have been able to watch a video or two showing a quick track way to do an evaluation including the easiest approach to take, benchmark tools to use, and step-by-step instructions on how to go about it.  

I asked for assistance and was sent information on some tools to use but I struggled with understanding the best way to use them. Having a live person suggest the best, most meaningful way to go about the evaluation based on my individual situation, would have been helpful too. 

I've used the solution for three months.

The stability is rock solid. There is no downtime so far and I have no performance issues.

The scalability seems solid. You could add nodes if needed.

Support is fantastic. It is quick, responsive, knowledgeable, and professional. 

Positive

We have a NetApp SAN. We switched as our storage was downsized by about half due to moving systems to the cloud and the SAN was EOL.

The initial setup was straightforward. A couple of hours on a remote support session with an engineer and we were up and running.

The solution was implemented in-house.

I'm not sure how to quantify ROI.

The setup cost was included with the price - so that was great! Buy from them directly rather than going through a reseller and you get 20% off.

We evaluated NetApp, Dell, SAN, and NAS solutions. All were way too costly.

Sales and support have been great to work with and the solution is solid without breaking the bank.

On-premises

We use the solution for HA storage for HVs.

We are an SMB that can't be bothered paying tens of thousands of dollars just to get a proper HA storage for a two node failover cluster. Therefore StarWind's vSAN was financially attractive from the start.

The reviews you can find all over the web incentivised us to research this solution deeper (e.g. just check all the great posts vom Kooler on Stackoverflow), leading to us actually implementing it.

We were coming from an S2D implementation which already gave us a ridiculous amount of headaches (bugs, performance stalls, "we know what's best for you" automatisms) in addition to being slow and annoying to administrate/debug while also having the most annoying documentation ever to be created by mankind. These solutions rush out some code and ship it and never fix anything (but break it every few weeks with patches).

The initial tests were easily implementable (without begging some sales folks for a POC, due to a free version being available) as well as proper documentation that you actually like to read due to it having been typed by a tech (and that also isn't behind a pay/registration wall).

As close to perfect as the documentation is, do read the blog posts to the two-node HA setup as well. Some minute details were only found in those.
There are no showstoppers, and not many things in general, just a few hints here and there.

The install itself is easy as pie. The config file is properly documented (you can do most things via GUI, just some things are set in the main config file).

Do help yourself to the iSCSI Powershell commands (Windows defaults from MS) when implementing. It is way more attractive than clicking via GUI.
(New-IscsiTargetPortal, Connect-IscsiTarget etc.)

Some things must be done via GUI though, since iSCSI has been implemented way back and "making scripting available" wasn't that widespread for developers back then. This being a Microsoft topic, not StarWind though. They would have had to make their very own iSCSI implementation otherwise.

For testing, you should use a proper tool like https://docs.microsoft.com/en-...
since "Windows copy from within the VM running on the test setup" can be flakey.
Not as in "the results aren't valid real world performance if you check with the Windows copy within a VM" but rather "non-scientific" since you can't extract much data from that process aside from size/time.

There is a visual bug with a specific part of iSCSI. It's Microsoft's fault, and, as usual, has never been fixed in over 15 years. Just don't panic if you experience it.
https://www.dell.com/support/k...
https://social.technet.microso...

Price-wise this is very attractive. The support is great (little that we needed due to the good docs) and I would expect you to reach a very good performance just like we did.

The next-best solution from my research back then - that you would actually want to use, so no S2D or anything - would have started at 7X or 8X the price. Since StarWind's solution has served us very well over the last two years already, I would recommend it.

To respond to the "how it has improved our organization," in a nutshell: it has provided very stable and performant storage-level HA which allows for live failover of VMs (as long as the compute doesn't die as well).

We like the ability to be installed and used on the same host, so we get the max performance possible.

It is easy to set up and maintain, resulting in a happy admin and low TCO/good ROI.

It offers good performance and stability and also makes for a happy admin.

It provides HA for our failover cluster storage where anything can go wrong up until compute, the thing still chugs along like nothing ever happened.

The upgrades are also very easy to implement. It's basically "click click click" once everything has been shut down and you're back up really quickly.

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.

ATM (20220609) is still necessary, since taking a node offline without properly activating the maintenance mode on the vSAN would trigger a full sync of the vSAN nodes.

This is fine and a good thing since it ensures data integrity. However, there is something in the making that would ensure integrity without a full sync after a node goes down, which, as stated above, one could "abuse" to patch (and boot = take down) the hypervisors during business hours 😁

Other than that, the thing is rock stable and chugging along without issues.
We are an SMB so we "only" have around 50 VMs on our FO cluster, which is a medium load for SSDs.

If you plan to go more to the "max" side of performance use, do proper testing!

I've used the solution for two years.

It's rock-stable.

So far, we only had visual issues in a specific place due to Microsoft being a PITA and never fixing any bugs they bring in (this one being over 15 years old).

It scales very easily.

Depending on your setup, their actual SAN might be a better fit for you, however, that's for your very specific case to decide.

We really only had contacted the support for the final checkup after setting it up ourselves, so that they could verify everything is running as it is supposed to.

That was great, so our experience has been great overall.

Positive

We previously used Microsoft S2D. It had bad documentation, offered bad performance, and had bad GUI and bad CLI.

The setup is very easy, and they offer very nice documentation and blog posts.

We did the implementation all in-house, self-taught by their great docs.

Since our HVs already run with Windows DC we had S2D included in the cost.

However, the operational costs were high. I'd easily say the invested time over a year with S2D would be $20-30K while StarWind's vSAN now took like $500-750 (yes, less than $1K!) over two years. 😎

Even if you add the license cost (which is cheap even with our 3-year premium support package) it is a no-brainer.

There is the "invisible" cost of you reading the docs, however, that comes with every solution. At least with StarWind, you have tech-to-tech documentation that you can actually use.

The pricing is very fair!

We looked into VMware and others. They usually had a way higher cost or worse performance or worse GUI/documentation, or all of those things together.

I'd advise others to use the free license to test it. The doc is also public. This is the way.

On-premises