# ES - Windows Multi Cluster Advice **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [August 24, 2020, 11:23am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/es-windows-multi-cluster-advice/246106 "2020-08-24T11:23:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![iccMe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ba8739/32.png) [@iccMe](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/iccMe)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2020, 11:23am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/es-windows-multi-cluster-advice/246106/1 "2020-08-24T11:23:19Z")
Hi, I am looking at creating an ES 3 node cluster all master and data in Windows on 3 hyper-V VM's. I have previously built a test environment in linux and attached 3 x separate 1TB storage drives for each node to replicate the cluster data. I am wondering do I need to do the same for windows or could I attach a shared storage cluster to the VM so that the 3 nodes would then use and see the same data? hope that makes sense Ian ---
**Author:** ![Christian\_Dahlqvist](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/christian_dahlqvist/32/4617_2.png) [@Christian\_Dahlqvist](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Christian_Dahlqvist)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2020, 4:38am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/es-windows-multi-cluster-advice/246106/2 "2020-08-25T04:38:09Z")
Using remote filesystems [is generally not recommended with Elasticsearch](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/7.9/tune-for-indexing-speed.html#_use_faster_hardware) as it can cause issues with both performance and stability. ---
**Author:** ![iccMe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ba8739/32.png) [@iccMe](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/iccMe)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2020, 7:12am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/es-windows-multi-cluster-advice/246106/3 "2020-08-25T07:12:33Z")
So it would be best to do exactly the same as my test environment and attach an extra 1TB storage drive to save and replicate the data for each node? Out of interest, is there any 'gotcha's' I need to consider when building on Windows, I am more familiar supporting a windows environment, but not opposed to using Linux in production if it works much better with ElasticSearch? Thanks Ian ---
**Author:** ![defalt](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/defalt/32/71379_2.png) [@defalt](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/defalt)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2020, 7:26am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/es-windows-multi-cluster-advice/246106/4 "2020-08-25T07:26:24Z")
> [@iccMe](#): > > would then use and see the same data This is not what elasticsearch is intended for and I think its not possible. > [@iccMe](#): > > attach an extra 1TB storage drive to save and replicate the data for each node Yes. Why do you have a problem with this approach? The good thing with elasticsearch is the data redundancy, if one of your harddrives dies you will have 2 other drives that still hold all the indices. > [@iccMe](#): > > any 'gotcha's' Elasticsearch works fine on windows and I had no problems with it. The only tricky thing that I couldnt get to work was starting it as a service. I tried all tutorials that I could fine but the cluster wouldn't connect. Now I use The NSSM (Non sucking serice manager) and it works perfectly. > [@iccMe](#): > > Linux in production if it works much better with Elasticsearch I asked the same question some time ago. They both work very well: > [@Are there any benefits of running elasticsearch in linux and not windows?](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/are-there-any-benefits-of-running-elasticsearch-in-linux-and-not-windows/244675): > > I was wondering if there are any significant performance differences between Linux, Windows and Docker. Thanks for your answers. Cheers, _defalt_ ---
**Author:** ![iccMe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ba8739/32.png) [@iccMe](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/iccMe)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2020, 7:35am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/es-windows-multi-cluster-advice/246106/5 "2020-08-25T07:35:38Z")
Thank you for all the information, with regards to: > [@defalt](#): > > Yes. > Why do you have a problem with this approach? The good thing with elasticsearch is the data redundancy, if one of your harddrives dies you will have 2 other drives that still hold all the indices. The virtual servers will be built on a SAN with it's own clustering diskspace. I was just wondering if that was an option to use, rather than carving up the diskspace for each node. I have no problem with this option, I just need to pass this information onto my manager and he asked the question whether that was an option. I just wanted to rule it out 100%, so that's great. Thanks for all the help and advice. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/3X/1/a/1ac57faf039f6b580b3f104ef42a2a89e41014de.png) [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2020, 7:35am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/es-windows-multi-cluster-advice/246106/6 "2020-09-22T07:35:38Z")
This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.