I'm looking to set up SQL Server 2012 installation with an Always On Availability Group, where the 'passive' replica will be hosted at another site on the WAN and using synchronous data commit - the idea being that we will have a hot standby with no loss of data in the event of a failure at our primary site.
One potential problem that I foresee is that the secondary site has slower storage than our primary site. I don't care about that in the event of a failure, we can live with slow speeds for a period of time until the primary site is restored. My worry is that, because we are using synchronous commit, that the slower disk speed at the secondary site will affect performance at the primary site during normal operation.
Is this a valid concern, or is it likely that the slower speed will be offset by, for example, the disk not having much read activity in comparison to the primary site?