We performed a comparison between Dell ECS and OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about MinIO, Dell Technologies, Red Hat and others in File and Object Storage."It is a stable platform."
"I have been satisfied with the stability."
"It's definitely good for unstructured data. In earlier days, we had Centera, so for the DR it's really good. It has load balancing facility, and we're using it with the Kemp Load Balancer."
"I have found Dell ECS to be scalable."
"The technology is very good, it performs well."
"The scalability is good."
"It is a stable solution."
"What I like best about this product is that it is a complete solution, both hardware, and software, by the same vendor."
"This solution helps us to account for peak seasons involving higher demand than usual. It also gives us confidence in the security of our overall systems."
"Security is also an important part of this solution. By default, things are running with limited privileges and securely confined to their own resources. This way, different users and projects can all use the same infrastructure."
"Overall, the solution's security throughout the stack and software supply chain is excellent."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the containers."
"Two stand-out features are the security model and value-add features that don't exist in Upstream Kubernetes."
"What I like best about OpenShift is that it can reduce some of the costs of having multiple applications because you can just move them into small container applications. For example, applications don't need to run for twenty days, only to be used up by Monday. Through OpenShift, you can move some of the small applications into any cloud. I also find the design of OpenShift good."
"The security features of OpenShift are strong when in use of role-based access."
"The scalability of OpenShift combined with Kubernetes is good. At least from the software standpoint, it becomes quite easy to handle the scalability through configuration. You need to constantly monitor the underlying infrastructure and ensure that it has adequate provisioning. If you have enough infrastructure, then managing the scalability is quite easy which is done through configuration."
"Dell ECS could improve the price of the solution. It is expensive."
"The disaster recovery could be improved because there should be something in-built within the ECS. Search and recovery should be in-built. Right now, we have to use some external tools for performing the recovery itself. For example, we're using Atempo or deploying Golden Superna, so it has dependency on the external third party vendors."
"There is room for improvement in the DPI reports, as they could be made more user-friendly."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"In Taiwan, they don't have professional technical support."
"Dell EMC ECS could improve by having Relational Database Services(RDS) to review progress. Additionally, if the training was provided it would be a benefit, it would be good for our engineers."
"You should be able to calculate so that when it's full it's 100% full, not just 90%."
"They could provide centralized reports."
"This is a fairly expensive solution."
"Needs work on volume handling (although this is already better with GlusterFS). Security (SSSD) would also be an improvement."
"One glaring flaw is how OpenShift handles operators. Sometimes operators are forced to go into a particular namespace. When you do that, OpenShift creates an installation plan for everything in that namespace. These operators may be completely separate from each other and have nothing to do with each other, but now they are tied at the hip. You can't upgrade one without upgrading all of them. That's a huge mistake and highly problematic."
"The tool lacks some features to make it compliant with Kubernetes"
"The whole area around the hybrid cloud could be improved. I would like to deploy a Red Hat OpenShift cluster on-premise and on the cloud, then have Red Hat do the entire hybrid cloud management."
"The interface could be simplified a bit more."
"OpenShift could improve by providing the ability to integrate with public cloud platforms. This way we can easily use the services that these platforms offer. For instance, Amazon AWS. However, all the three major hyper-scalers solutions offer excellent DevOps and CI/CD tooling. If there was an easy way to integrate with them it would be beneficial. We need a way to easily integrate with the monitoring and dashboard services that they provide."
"My team has found some bugs in OpenShift due to continuous integration, and this is an area for improvement in the platform. RedHat should fix the bugs. Another area for improvement in OpenShift is that upgrading clusters can be challenging, resulting in downtime. Application support also needs improvement in OpenShift because the platform doesn't support all applications in the cloud. I'd like upgraded storage in the next release of OpenShift, especially when I need to do a DR exercise. It would also be good if the platform allows mirroring with another cluster, or more portability in terms of moving applications to another cluster."
Dell ECS is ranked 5th in File and Object Storage with 25 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. Dell ECS is rated 8.0, while OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Dell ECS writes "Enables multiple protocol support, but its IOPS functionality needs improvement in terms of performance ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". Dell ECS is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), Amazon AWS, NetApp StorageGRID, MinIO and Red Hat Ceph Storage, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure and Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS).
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.