We performed a comparison between Huawei OceanStor and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is very easy to install and configure. It has got excellent diagnostics. If you really need to see how the box is performing, the console gives you a lot of information. You can set thresholds as well as alerts based on the thresholds, which is a very powerful functionality. They are very proactive. They know how to monitor and manage the systems. They see a problem, and they are all over it before us. They see the problem before we see it, which is very good."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"It's incredibly easy to use and greatly simplified our ability to both deploy and manage our storage subsystems."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The most valuable features of Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its superior performance compared to other flash tiers, as well as its ease of use, with an intuitive user interface that is simple to deploy and use."
"One of the best features is the support, which is excellent."
"Pure FlashArray X NVMe has low latency and high Ops. It is an evergreen model."
"The most valuable feature of Huawei OceanStor is the hybrid applications."
"Huawei OceanStor provides numerous features that are tailored to cater to the requirements of all types of companies."
"This is a stable storage system."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Its technical support team is helpful."
"If your virtual machine that resides on it completely fills the storage space, thanks to it's built-in function of all-zero data space reclamation, you just have to ask to System Engineer to run a zero-free on hosts (thin provisioned) and you will get more space instantaneously."
"Huawei OceanStor is stable."
"The solution is scalable."
"Even though the complete workload will fill out the AFF storage box, it will give us sustained stability."
"The solution’s thin provisioning has allowed us to add new applications without having to purchase additional storage. We use thin provisioning for everything. We use the deduplication compression functionality for all of our NetApps. If we weren't using thin provisioning, we'd probably have two to times more storage on our floor right now than we do today."
"This solution helps accelerate demanding enterprise applications. VMware workloads, the database, and Oracle Solaris are hosted on AFF, which means that our primary priority workloads are on AFF and that the secondary ones are on FAS. That includes the SAN national cloud."
"The tool has lowered latency."
"The most valuable features are the IO performance that we get, the cluster part, and the increased workload and performance with the SSDs."
"Previously we had migrated from Dell EMC and we had a lot of difficulties moving data around. Now, if we need to move it to any slower storage, we can move it with just a vault move within the cluster. Even moving data between clusters is extremely simple using SnapMirror. The mobility options for data in All Flash FAS have been awesome."
"The performance is outstanding when it's all Flash. That's the biggest bang for the buck that we get."
"The tool's most valuable feature is efficiency."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product."
"We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"I'd like to see the product implement active replication for vehicles such as VMware."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"Our use cases require more multi-tenant capabilities and additional VLAN interfaces for separating different customers. We currently use it to provide storage, sometimes shared storage, to different customers, but it is less flexible in comparison to a dedicated solution."
"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."
"The deployment took a little longer."
"The tool's performance is slow for DBs. We plan to move from Huawei OceanStor to Pure Storage. Its customer service is not good."
"The product must improve the local technical support in China."
"I would like to see the next generation all-flash, which could be combined."
"The duration of the built-in snapshot technology must be improved."
"The upgrading process needs improvement. Deploy it and notify the customers when new versions and stuff comes out. I don't think they're doing that well."
"Unfortunately, this product doesn't support Flash Disks, but it's IOPS capacity is a great compromise."
"Configuration complexity and the tools available."
"The bad part about having scalability is the expense. It is currently extremely expensive, to be able to scale so fast on flash."
"To be more competitive in the industry, they can develop deduplication, compression, and smarter features in the same array instead of all-flash."
"The certification classes are good, but they don't cover enough of the material, and the exams only test on what is covered in class."
"We have had issues with CIFS presentations and outages, so if that was removed, we could do seamless upgrades without affecting CIFS presentations. That would be an advantage. That's about the only improvement I can think of."
"The initial setup was a little complex, because we weren't very knowledgeable in the NetApp at the time. We were using a third-party, and they didn't have a lot of technical individuals, so it took a while to get it out."
"I would like for them to develop the ability to detach the fabric pool. Once you've added it to an aggregate it's there for life and it would be nice to disconnect it if we ever had to."
"With some of the larger clusters being able to do a patch upgrade is helping. They still take three, four hours by the time you get the night started, finish things up, do the upgrade."
"Offering the ability to actively write data on a single volume spanning multiple clusters is significant."
Huawei OceanStor is ranked 12th in All-Flash Storage with 31 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 281 reviews. Huawei OceanStor is rated 8.4, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Huawei OceanStor writes "User-friendly and robust storage solution with good performance and easy setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". Huawei OceanStor is most compared with Huawei OceanStor Dorado, Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, IBM FlashSystem and HPE Primera, whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, Pure Storage FlashArray and Huawei OceanStor Dorado. See our Huawei OceanStor vs. NetApp AFF report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
