Here are considerations to take into account:
- SMB (Server Message Block) Supported and feasible for Scale-Out File Server. With SMB 3.0 and later, you can configure Scale-Out File Servers in a Windows Server Failover Cluster to store SQL Server data. In this scenario, SMB file shares can be used for SQL Server databases, but they are not the same as the traditional CSV approach that utilizes block-level access. SMB 3.0 can be used to provide Scale-Out File Shares for storing application data for SQL Server, and this is feasible when configured properly in Windows Server 2012 R2 and newer. However, while supported, this setup is less common for SQL Server in production environments compared to traditional block-level storage.
- NFS (Network File System) Not supported for CSV in SQL Server clustering.
- NAS (Network-Attached Storage) Not typically recommended for SQL Server clusters with CSV. While NAS can provide shared storage via file protocols like SMB or NFS, it does not meet the requirements for Cluster Shared Volumes in SQL Server clustering, as CSVs require block-level access. For SQL Server Failover Clustering and CSV, SAN is typically preferred.
- SAN (Storage Area Network) Recommended and supported for traditional CSV implementations. SAN is well suited for providing block-level storage, which is what is required for SQL Server and other applications that use Cluster Shared Volumes in Failover Clusters. It supports the high performance and low latency needed for SQL Server workloads. When using SAN, CSV is usually backed by NTFS or ReFS, which are compatible with block-level storage.
More at https://zcusa.951200.xyz/en-us/windows-server/failover-clustering/failover-cluster-csvs
If the above response helps answer your question, remember to "Accept Answer" so that others in the community facing similar issues can easily find the solution. Your contribution is highly appreciated.
hth
Marcin