We performed a comparison between NetApp StorageGRID and Red Hat Ceph Storage 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."Right now, we have an older StorageGRID. I like that we can grow it."
"It helps automate our storage infrastructure."
"The feature of StorageGRID that I find most valuable for ensuring data durability and protection is its Information Lifecycle Management functionality."
"It has enabled us to save money on storage costs. We removed our tape library."
"Duplication, interface and the manageability is good and simple."
"The ability to get to the StorageGRID from anywhere on my network. The solution is remote. You don't have to be at a physical location."
"The speed of the disks removed the bottleneck from our storage."
"StorageGRID is designed for cloud-based, highly scalable storage. Think big names like service providers like Google who need massive storage volumes with scalability. It also offers cloud-enabled storage capabilities with cloud management functionality. So, if you prioritize scalability and cloud integration, StorageGRID is the way to go. Its object-based storage is built specifically for that purpose."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."
"We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes."
"The only real issue that we have run into is, when we are cloning, we cannot do a thin provision clone, it has to be a full clone."
"The redundancy and reliability are great, but I also see room for improvement there. I would like to see more efficiency in the storage and dedupe/compression solutions."
"I would like to see them integrate more with the monitoring platforms. It is a bit difficult to get automated monitoring of the system."
"Beyond the initial setup, this product is a little bit difficult to configure."
"There was a small amount of confusion when working with StorageGRID and Active Directory for access. We had to do things three to four times resulting in our engineer troubleshooting a couple of things. The location of the menu, along with what is inside the menu: configurations, settings, etc., is not straightforward to users. Most users are Windows-based. So, when make logical changes to the menu which are not similar to Windows, users and administrators get confused."
"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."
"The integration with more apps has room for improvement."
"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."
"Ceph is not a mature product at this time. Guides are misleading and incomplete. You will meet all kind of bugs and errors trying to install the system for the first time. It requires very experienced personnel to support and keep the system in working condition, and install all necessary packets."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"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."
"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."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
NetApp StorageGRID is ranked 6th in File and Object Storage with 12 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 2nd in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews. NetApp StorageGRID is rated 8.4, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of NetApp StorageGRID writes "Scalable object storage with robust data durability with efficient geo-distribution and comprehensive lifecycle management ensuring managing of large volumes of unstructured data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". NetApp StorageGRID is most compared with MinIO, Dell ECS, Scality RING, Cloudian HyperStore and Hitachi Content Platform, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Dell ECS. See our NetApp StorageGRID vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage 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.
