I believe there is some lack of clarity on this page. It starts by discussing High Availability for SAP HANA using Availability Zones (which provide the highest degree of SLA with 99.99%). Then, in the following paragraph, it states "For increased availability within a region, it's advised to deploy two VMs with two HANA instances using an Availability Set."
It should be the other way around. Availability Sets do not provide increased availability in comparison with Availability Zones; on the contrary.
In my opinion, it would be best to re-shuffle these paragraphs to better clarify the order of increasing availability: discuss AS first, then AZ. Would like to have some peer input on this, though.
Document Details
⚠ Do not edit this section. It is required for learn.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.
ID: 7a6c5405-1c3f-ae70-87f3-1b23489c6719
Version Independent ID: 5862e9a6-19d0-1f88-0064-6852db0bdb35
I believe there is some lack of clarity on this page. It starts by discussing High Availability for SAP HANA using Availability Zones (which provide the highest degree of SLA with 99.99%). Then, in the following paragraph, it states "For increased availability within a region, it's advised to deploy two VMs with two HANA instances using an Availability Set."
It should be the other way around. Availability Sets do not provide increased availability in comparison with Availability Zones; on the contrary.
In my opinion, it would be best to re-shuffle these paragraphs to better clarify the order of increasing availability: discuss AS first, then AZ. Would like to have some peer input on this, though.
Document Details
⚠ Do not edit this section. It is required for learn.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.