Hello!
Please excuse me if you think my question is silly, but before deploying something in a production environment I'd like to dot the i's and cross the t's.
1) Suppose there's a two node cluster with a Hyper-V role that hosts a number of highly available VM.
If the both cluster nodes are up and running an administrator can initiate a planned failover wich will transfer all VMsincluding their system state to another node without downtime.
In case any cluster node goes down unexpectedly the unplanned failover fires up that will transfer all VMs to another nodeWITHOUT their system state. As far as I understand this can lead to some data loss.
http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/how-does-live-migration-differ-from-vm-failover/
If, for example, I have an Exchange vm and it would be transfered to the second node during unplanned failover in the Hyper-V cluster I will lose some data by design.
2) Suppose there's a two node cluster with the Exchange clustered installation: in case one node crashes the other takes over without any data loss.
Conclusion: it's more disaster resilient to implement some server role in an "ordinary" cluster that deploy it inside a vm in the Hyper-V cluster.
Is it correct?
Thank you in advance,
Michael