Is AlwaysOn the preferred way to guarantee high availability?

[Brock_Kline]

When migrating existing OnBase DB to new SQL Version (and new hardware) is AlwaysOn Availablity Groups the preferred way to guarantee high availability?

We've been told by our server and Database teams that there are two options:
1. SQL AlwaysOn Availablity Groups
2. Traditional windows failover cluster

They are asking us which they one they should configure for us. We suspect that we should go with AlwaysOn Availability groups. However, we want to see what others in the OnBase community are currently using for their high availability database solutions. I did search the forum, but it looks like the posts regarding AlwaysOn are several years old.

Thank you,

-Brock

[Chris_Tann · Accepted solution]

Hi Brock:

Knowing only what you've mentioned about your environment & Hyland solution I would tend to agree with your leaning toward AAGs/ Availability Groups. In a traditional Windows Failover Cluster running SQL as a cluster service there is a 1-3 minute downtime moving between nodes, since the instance has to shut down and startup on the new node. Availability Groups can provide more seamless transitions between SQL servers and ultimately allow for enhanced availability within the application(s) you have.

Thanks,

Chris