SAP shared file systems: Azure Files vs Azure NetApp Files vs self-managed NFS
Verdict: Use Azure Files or Azure NetApp Files for SAP shared volumes (sapmnt, transport, hana/shared). Prefer a managed share over a self-managed NFS cluster. For Azure Files, a private endpoint gives automatic zonal redirect without remounting.
| Criterion | Azure Files | Azure NetApp Files | Self-managed NFS cluster |
|---|---|---|---|
| Management | Fully managed SMB/NFS, no file-server VMs | Fully managed, very low latency | You patch and cluster it yourself |
| Best fit | transport directory, sapmnt | hana/shared, scale-out standby, low-latency shares | Only when neither managed service is available |
| Resilience note | Private endpoint auto-redirects NFS clients to a healthy zone | Cross-region replication for DR | Adds HA and patching burden |
Rules
- Azure Files and Azure NetApp Files are the recommended services for SAP shared file shares such as the transport directory and sapmnt volumes.
- In HANA scale-out with non-shared data and log, /hana/shared must still be shared across nodes via NFS on Azure NetApp Files or Azure Files.
- A managed share removes the need to build and cluster NFS server VMs; use self-managed NFS only when the managed services are unavailable.
- For WSFC ASCS/SCS, SMB on Azure Files or Azure NetApp Files is the file-share alternative to shared disk or SOFS/SIOS.
- A private endpoint for the Azure Files account lets NFS clients redirect to a healthy zone during a zonal failure without remounting.
Traps
- Azure Files supports concurrent mounts from many clients; it is not single-writer.
- Write Accelerator is a Premium-disk M-series feature and has no bearing on Azure Files performance.