We performed a comparison between Kaminario K2 [EOL] and Pure Storage FlashArray 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."Pure FlashArray X NVMe will quickly overcome all the hurdles you face, including network and latency issues."
"The Pure1 component is most valuable at this point in time when comparing it with EMC. Pure1 is where you can have your diagnostics in the cloud, so you can look at things from your mobile phone."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The duplication algorithm allows us to get a lot more use out of less storage. We're running a five terabyte array right now and we're running probably about 30 terabytes on it. So the duplication rate is pretty phenomenal, without a cost to performance. It still runs pretty smoothly."
"Pure has signature security technology, which cannot be deleted, even if you are an administrator."
"The standout features for us in Pure FlashArray X NVMe are its robust DDoS protection, seamless transparent failover, and failback capabilities ensuring high availability."
"The latency is good."
"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."
"The capacity that we're saving by using Kaminario's K2 is giving us a four-to-one ratio for our deduplication."
"Logic/software management"
"The increased performance is many times above our previous array performance in all metrics. Integration with vSphere features is also a definite plus."
"Data reduction and snapshot abilities: Smaller footprint in the datacenter (lower cost for power, cooling, etc.)."
"Implementation of the solution is very simple."
"This solution has improved our organization in the way that we used to see latency but now with this solution we don't. It also has good performance. Latencies have come down for our performance in the SQL databases. We can put a lot more in a lot less in terms of space savings. We also save data center space have good deduplication."
"The amount of throughput that we're getting is really nice."
"This solution has improved our organization. In the past, we had reports that were taking up to two hours and after switching to SSD storage the overall processing power dropped to half an hour. The end users saw an immediate performance gain."
"Very efficient storage"
"Support has been helpful."
"The reliability is very good."
"It simplifies the overall management. We don't have to worry about storage anymore."
"The most valuable feature is test performance. It helps us store large amounts of data along with providing us faster retrieval of data."
"You cannot tag a LUN with a description, and that should be improved. What I like on the Unity side is that when I expand LUNs or do things, there is an information field on the LUN. This is the Information field that you can tag on your LUNs to let yourself know, "Hey, I've added this much space on this date". Pure lacks that ability. So, you don't have a mechanism that's friendly for tracking your data expansions on the LUN and for adding any additional information. That's a downside for me."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."
"In fututre releases, some focus on anti-malware should be there."
"They could add more support for file storage and different types of storage."
"The software layer has to improve."
"We would like to see VNC integration or be able to use Pure Storage with VNC."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing of the product."
"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."
"A single pane of glass to monitor/manage multiple arrays would be helpful."
"Some of the nice to haves for us, in terms of today, would be VVols but again, it’s not a critical feature."
"I would like them to improve the look of the product’s external casing and shelves."
"I think it should have better performance with small files. With big data, its performance is top notch, but it is difficult to load small files."
"The front panel of the drive shelf doesn't always seat firmly."
"Access to technical support should be improved for our region. Technical support is good, but they're very hard to access."
"I'm hoping to see Active Directory integration. Right now, you still have to use a local admin account to log in and manage everything."
"There's always an opportunity for new feature functionality."
"The number of Filesystems is limited, which it is not on the EMC VNX."
"Currently, the solution fails to support file screening."
"The data reduction that we had initially anticipated when we bought Pure and we move over, is way lower than the expected reduction. It depends on the workloads, of course. But that has been a challenge at times."
"There are many features which need to be added, particularly on the replication side."
"Automation could be simplified."
"I would like a feature to integrate with external or cloud solutions. For example, if I want to use this storage for a backup from the cloud, I want to have integration with the cloud vendors, such as Microsoft, Oracles, or Amazon. It could be available as an API to allow seamless integration. Additionally, the solution could improve by having native integration with a cloud provider, such as VMware or Microsoft, this would reduce the need to use third-party solutions to complete the task."
"Pure Storage FlashArray could improve some aspects. There are certain features that are good and there are some features that I see some issues with at the technical level. Those issues are related to replication. They need to resolve those issues, which I have already highlighted to the Pure team. Additionally, there are some issues in the active cluster that could improve."
Earn 20 points
Kaminario K2 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage while Pure Storage FlashArray is ranked 3rd in All-Flash Storage with 174 reviews. Kaminario K2 [EOL] is rated 8.8, while Pure Storage FlashArray is rated 9.2. 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 Pure Storage FlashArray writes "Effective provisioning, helpful support, and reliable". Kaminario K2 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Pure Storage FlashArray is most compared with Dell PowerStore, NetApp AFF, HPE Nimble Storage, IBM FlashSystem and VMware vSAN.
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.