We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and StarWind Virtual SAN 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."Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"Speed and high availability have been the most valuable for us."
"StarWind has provided us with a top-notch, well-supported, robust vSAN offering when other vendors have moved to hyper-converged solutions that are outside of our average clients' reach from a financial and resource perspective."
"In our case, the cost and high availability are the two most important factors which we were looking for in a solution."
"It also provides a high degree of mobility, as the virtual SAN can be moved relatively painlessly between on-site devices and the cloud."
"The support has been amazing and quick to reply."
"Updates to server hardware are now painless and done during working hours with zero stress. We had a RAID failure a few months back, and nobody in the building even noticed and there was no after hours time used for repair."
"Active-active work mode leads to true redundancy of storage and allows us to distribute the load between multiple nodes."
"This software lets us maintain storage redundancy across both of our Hyper-V hosts, so if one goes down the environment fails over to the other and we have minimal to no downtime."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"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."
"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."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"It took me a long time to get the storage drivers for the communication with Kubernetes up and running. The documentation could improve it is lacking information. I'm not sure if this is a Ceph problem or if Ceph should address this, but it was something I ran into. Additionally, there is a performance issue I am having that I am looking into, but overall I am satisfied with the performance."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"I had to buy upgraded support, which was not a problem, but it wasn't a prorated amount, so I paid for the support, the full upgrade, but I only got a couple of months out of it because it was only good until renewal time."
"If there was one feature I would like to see it would be a built-in subsystem for managing UPS backups shutdown procedures providing a way to initiate VM shutdown on all host servers, shut down the host servers, then put the fault-tolerant mirroring in standby, and finally shut down the StarWind SANs."
"If there was a way to automatically put disks in maintenance mode when shutting the host down and exit maintenance mode automatically, that would simplify things."
"While we had little to no issues in setting up StarWind and received excellent support from the StarWind technicians, we would have appreciated a clearer guideline for a setup with the free version of StarWind Management Console or, in other words - for the setup with the PowerShell."
"Security on the ISCSI protocol could be improved by adding features like OS-type control access, especially for the data center environment."
"I would like them to invest time in reducing the complexity of the startup and shutdown procedure."
"While we had no problems setting the system up, and service technicians from StarWind could assist us very well, they could provide some form of in-depth documentation."
"The console is something that I feel could be improved. There is nothing technically wrong with it, but it can be jazzed up and/or made to be a little more intuitive."
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews while StarWind Virtual SAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 183 reviews. Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2, while StarWind Virtual SAN is rated 9.6. 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 StarWind Virtual SAN writes "Excellent support, great performance, and good redundancy". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Scality RING, whereas StarWind Virtual SAN is most compared with VMware vSAN, StorMagic SvSAN, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, DataCore SANsymphony and HPE SimpliVity. See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StarWind Virtual SAN 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.
