We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and StorPool based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."High reliability with commodity hardware."
"What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."
"Replicated and erasure coded pools have allowed for multiple copies to be kept, easy scale-out of additional nodes, and easy replacement of failed hard drives. The solution continues working even when there are errors."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"The two 10GE networks provide redundancy and increased performance as they serve as two separate networks doubling the throughput and doing multipathing and load balancing. We now have a high performance shared storage system which enables us to run on private cloud. Our previous system used bare-metal hardware, which provided high performance but inflexible management. Now we have best of both worlds, SSD-class performance with flexibility of a private cloud system."
"Performance, redundancy, scalability and cost-effectiveness. StorPool delivers superbly in all of these areas."
"With StorPool we were able to build live failover on top of our LXC infrastructure. This allows us both to live-migrate containers between compute nodes without any downtime and, in case of an entire node suffering any type of failure, we can bring all containers back online within a minute on a spare compute node."
"Creating snapshots within seconds for big disks has helped our different migration projects since it allows us to perform them in a short period of time."
"The speed of the storage solution also allows us to provide service to applications that are very I/O intensive."
"The team behind it was very engaged and had the skills and ability to support a service provider."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"I have encountered issues with stability when replication factor was not 3, which is the default and recommended value. Go below 3 and problems will arise."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"In the deployment step, we need to create some config files to add Ceph functions in OpenStack modules (Nova, Cinder, Glance). It would be useful to have a tool that validates the format of the data in those files, before generating a deploy with failures."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"Live and historical performance statistics would be useful, though my understanding is that this is on the way in a future release."
"Monitoring and statistics UI is a bit clumsy."
"It would be good if, with next releases, StorPool provide a better GUI for monitoring and statistics. This would make our experience even better and complete."
"I have personally met with multiple Storpool engineers and spoke about different options and features. There are too many features that we don't know or use yet. My recommendation would be to promote the new features and give users different examples of how they can be used and how we can benefit from them."
"he only place we feel they could improve is the time it takes to bring new features to production."
"At times we need to check the disks and do some minor operations. A friendlier user interface would be useful in such cases."
Earn 20 points
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews while StorPool is ranked 20th in Software Defined Storage (SDS). Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2, while StorPool is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". On the other hand, the top reviewer of StorPool writes "Enabled us to increase both our gross margins and performance while also decreasing latency". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and NetApp StorageGRID, whereas StorPool is most compared with VMware vSAN, LINBIT SDS and DataCore SANsymphony. See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StorPool report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.