
Choosing A Windows Clustering Strategy in 2025
Azure Local vs. Traditional SAN Clustering vs. Storage Spaces Direct
- Introduction
- Azure Local (formerly Azure Stack HCI)
- Traditional WSFC with External SAN/NAS Storage
- Windows Server Failover Clustering with Storage Spaces Direct (S2D)
- Comparative Analysis of the Three Solutions
- Industry and Workload Considerations
- Optional Azure Integration for WSFC (SAN or S2D) Clusters
- Decision Framework – Choosing the Right Approach
- Conclusion
Introduction
In modern Windows infrastructure, there are multiple strategies for building highly available clusters. This content, originally published as a blog, was adapted into a presentation for a session at MMS MOA 2025, To Windows Server or Not: The Clustering Question, where the PowerPoint version is available. The session compares three key solutions side-by-side: Azure Local (Azure Stack HCI), Windows Server Failover Clustering with External Storage (traditional 3-tier architecture using SAN/NAS), and Windows Server Failover Clustering with Storage Spaces Direct (S2D). We explore the technical architecture of each, their pros and cons, and strategic considerations. Key factors like cost, scalability, performance, hardware needs, manageability, cloud integration, licensing, and best-fit use cases are analyzed with comparison tables for clarity. A dedicated section on demo scenarios is included to showcase strengths and differences in a lab environment. Finally, we provide a decision framework to guide choosing the right approach based on an organization’s needs.