What is our primary use case?
My main use case for StarWind Virtual SAN is to simulate a shared storage for a Hyper-V cluster in a lab environment, where I am testing high availability, failover scenarios, and validation solutions before applying them in production. The goal is to create a cost-effective setup for homologation and planning without needing physical SAN hardware.
I set up a two-node Hyper-V cluster using StarWind Virtual SAN to replicate storage between the servers, which helped me simulate those high availability takeover scenarios. Each host had a logical disk, a local disk, and StarWind Virtual SAN created a virtual shared volume over the network. I then tested the failover scenarios by turning off one of the nodes to simulate a hardware failure, which allowed the cluster to successfully move the virtual machines to the other node, validating the high availability behavior. It was a key part of my homologation and disaster recovery planning process.
I also deployed Windows Servers virtual machines to test and validate customer solutions in a safe lab environment before any changes were applied in production. This helps me ensure compatibility and reduce the risk during real deployments.
What is most valuable?
The best features StarWind Virtual SAN offers are real-time data replication, which ensures storage availability between the nodes in a Hyper-V cluster, ease of creating and managing virtual disks, even through PowerShell in the free version, and consistent redundancy without requiring expensive SAN hardware, making it a great fit for lab and test environments. These features allowed me to simulate a reliable and cost-effective shared storage setup for high availability testing and customer solution validation.
The real-time replication works during my lab tests, and it made my disaster recovery planning easier and more reliable. I configured synchronous replication between two nodes, so when data was written on one host, it was immediately mirrored to the other, which allowed me to simulate failover and recovery scenarios reliably. For example, shutting down one of the hosts and confirming that virtual machines could continue running from the other node without data loss helped me make my disaster recovery planning more accurate and gave me confidence in the system's behavior under failure conditions. Another nice feature is that even in the free version, I can automate most of the setup using PowerShell, which is great for scripting environments.
StarWind Virtual SAN has positively impacted my organization by reducing infrastructure costs, which allows me to implement shared storage simulation without needing a physical SAN device. It also saves time during the planning and validation of changes in production, as I can run multiple tests in a lab environment using real workloads and scenarios.
What needs improvement?
One area for improvement regarding StarWind Virtual SAN is the lack of a full-feature trial. At the time I tested it, I had access only to the free version, which required using PowerShell scripts for most configurations. This made the initial learning curve steeper, especially for users who aren't comfortable with scripting. Also, since the solution depends heavily on network interfaces for replication, any misconfiguration or instability in the network could affect cluster reliability, which makes it sensitive in a certain environment.
The main reason I gave it a 7 instead of an 8 or 9 is the limited feature access in a free version available during my testing. I had to configure everything via PowerShell, which increased complexity and time to deploy. Also, the sensitivity to network stability during replication tests made it less ideal for certain production-like scenarios. With a full-feature trial and better network resilience, it could easily rank higher.
For how long have I used the solution?
I use StarWind Virtual SAN since 2019 for less than one year, during a test and validation period in a lab environment.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
In my experience, StarWind Virtual SAN was stable during testing. I ran it on a two-node Hyper-V cluster setup, and I didn't experience any unexpected crashes or major issues. As long as the network used for replication was stable, the solution performed reliably.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I only tested StarWind Virtual SAN in a lab environment with two nodes, so I didn't explore its full scalability. However, within that limited setup, it handled the workload well. I can't speak to how it performs in a large production scale environment, but based on documentation, it appears to support multi-node configurations and growing workloads.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before using StarWind Virtual SAN, I had to rely on more complex or limited setups to simulate clustered environments, which often took days to prepare. With StarWind Virtual SAN, I am able to deploy and test failover scenarios in just a few hours, significantly speeding up the validation cycle for planned changes. It also makes it easier to reproduce real-world issues in a lab, which improves troubleshooting and reduces risks before implementing changes in production.
I previously used basic local storage or iSCSI setups to simulate shared storage in lab environments, which were more complex, less flexible, and required more manual configuration. I switched to StarWind Virtual SAN because it allows me to simulate shared storage across nodes more easily, using software-defined storage without the need for additional hardware.
What was our ROI?
I have seen a return on investment in terms of time saved and resources used. By using StarWind Virtual SAN, I avoided the need to purchase physical shared storage, which would have increased cost and setup complexity. I estimate it saved me several hours per deployment since I could quickly simulate a Hyper-V cluster with shared storage entirely in software. This allowed me to validate solutions faster and reduce time to decision for changes going into production.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I had experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing through using the free version of StarWind Virtual SAN for testing purposes, so there was no cost involved during my evaluation. That made it very attractive for a lab environment, but the lack of access to the full feature set, including the GUI, limited the depth of testing. I didn't go through the full license or pricing process, so I can't speak to that in detail.
What other advice do I have?
I gave StarWind Virtual SAN a rating of 7 out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Other
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.