We performed a comparison between Kaminario K2 [EOL] and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."It is an easy to use product for all of my team members."
"Data reduction and compression. Sub millisecond latency."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. You simply plug it in and turn it on."
"The solution is very reliable."
"It helps us maintain uptime much better than other solutions we've used in the past, and the support is extremely quick and responsive."
"The deduplication and compression meet all of our system requirements."
"The performance and the ever-growing maintenance are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The connections are a lot faster than what we had in the past. One InfiniBand does what we did on all of our Fibre Channels."
"Latency is definitely the big key for us."
"The most valuable aspect is the use of solid-state storage drives instead of spinning drives."
"The ratio between the physical storage and the storage we use is very high."
"Implementation of the solution is very simple."
"The capacity that we're saving by using Kaminario's K2 is giving us a four-to-one ratio for our deduplication."
"Built-in snapshot support gives us SAN-side functionality most other platforms would have had us license separately."
"Data reduction and snapshot abilities: Smaller footprint in the datacenter (lower cost for power, cooling, etc.)."
"The increased performance is many times above our previous array performance in all metrics. Integration with vSphere features is also a definite plus."
"It scales well, probably more so than the FAS. Because of the storage density with the SSDs, we can't buy enough SSDs to max one out."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is data protection and snapshot technology for backup."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity. It is easy to use."
"The most valuable features of AFF are its speed and the responsive support from NetApp."
"Our architecture has historically relied on RDMs, so AFF has enabled us to easily migrate from our old EMC PowerMax to the new NetApp. It's been pretty smooth. We have a lot of SAP servers in our environment, so performance is critical for us."
"Supports file formatting, the main protocols, and the hot swapping of disks and features."
"Snapshots, snap clones, backups, flexibility, and agility are valuable features. I like that NetApp AFF is easy to use. We can automate everything for our backups and use cases. It's fast and simple, and provides storage to all of our VMware ESX hosts. It expands easily as well."
"Speed. it's very performance designed. It's designed to have a lot of high speed."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup."
"I would love to see a true one click upgrade solution. Right now, you have to click and schedule an appointment with Pure Storage to be able to upgrade. I would love for it to automatically download, install, and fall-over every controller as it updates."
"FlashArray's capacity for forecasting should be improved because it needs to be a bit more current. I think it's bundled with the deduplication and other compression factors. We need more user interfaces for forecasting in this software and more interfaces need to be integrated with this array management tool."
"It took us a year to get it to stabilize and to get the best out of Pure."
"The backend of this solution utilizes an Active/Passive architecture, rather than an Active/Active architecture, which is a disadvantage, when compared to some of its competitors. Its storage capacity should be expanded in the next release."
"In the next release of the solution I would like to see Vormetric native block encryption."
"The solution is not cheap."
"I would like to have an easy way to determine the cost per VM so that I can present a solution to our customers."
"I would like to see them work with Cisco, so it comes off the FIs, instead of having to go through my 10-gig network."
"The interface look and feel could be improved."
"The system currently has a 15TB LUN size limit and that snapshots need to be scheduled through script API instead of the GUI."
"Access to technical support should be improved for our region. Technical support is good, but they're very hard to access."
"I would love to see capacity on its DRAM. I know it's not cost effective for them to do it, but I think that it could be a big differentiator and was a big differentiator from the beginning."
"The management graphical interface needs more improvement."
"Improved scale and budget planning with flexibility of the solution for budget needs and efficiency for growth with the great optimization ratio due to the nature of our use."
"Some of the nice to haves for us, in terms of today, would be VVols but again, it’s not a critical feature."
"We have had trouble with restoring applications, and if there is more support for application-aware backups then that would be great."
"To be more competitive in the industry, they can develop deduplication, compression, and smarter features in the same array instead of all-flash."
"I need faster Fibre Channel over Ethernet. They top out at 10GBs today and I would like that to go to 40 or 100."
"The only downside to NetApp AFF is its price."
"During the initial setup, you need to know what you are doing."
"I would like there to be a way to break out the 40 gig ports on them. We have a lot of 10 gigs in our environment. It is a big challenge breaking out the 40 gig coming out of the filer. It would be nice to have good old 10 gig ports again, or a card that has just 10 gig ports on it."
"The cost of this solution should be reduced."
"We currently use some thin provisioning for our planning system, but we will probably move away from thin provisioning because our Solaris planning system actually has some issues with the thin provisioning and way Solaris handles it, since Solaris uses a ZFS file system. The ZFS file system doesn't like the thin provisioning changing things and it brings systems down, which is bad."
Earn 20 points
Kaminario K2 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews. Kaminario K2 [EOL] is rated 8.8, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Kaminario K2 [EOL] writes "Built-in snapshot support gives us SAN-side functionality most other platforms license separately". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". Kaminario K2 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell Unity XT, Dell PowerStore, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash 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.