We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and VAST Data based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"Ceph has simplified my storage integration. I no longer need two or three storage systems, as Ceph can support all my storage needs. I no longer need OpenStack Swift for REST object storage access, I no longer need NFS or GlusterFS for filesystem sharing, and most importantly, I no longer need LVM or DRBD for my virtual machines in OpenStack."
"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."
"This has been one of the most reliable storage systems that I have ever used."
"The solution is useful for machine learning and scientific applications, including computer simulations."
"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."
"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."
"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"The read/write ratio is an area in the solution with some flaws and needs improvement."
"The write performance could be improved because it is less than half of the read performance."
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 2nd in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews while VAST Data is ranked 11th in File and Object Storage with 2 reviews. Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2, while VAST Data 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 VAST Data writes "Stability-wise, a device that has been up and running for years". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and NetApp StorageGRID, whereas VAST Data is most compared with Pure Storage FlashBlade, NetApp AFF, Pure Storage FlashArray, Qumulo and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI). See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. VAST Data report.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object 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.