We compared Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
User reviews indicate that Red Hat Ceph Storage is praised for its scalability, flexibility, and efficiency, with good customer service, while MinIO is valued for its scalability, high performance and user-friendly interface. Red Hat Ceph Storage is commended for reliability, compatibility, and cost-effectiveness, while MinIO is preferred for its simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and ease of use. Both products have positive ROI but may benefit from enhancements in different areas such as scalability, performance, and user interface.
Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage is praised for its scalability, flexibility, and ability to handle large data amounts, while MinIO is valued for its scalability, high performance, and user-friendly interface. Both products integrate seamlessly with existing systems.
Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage has been praised for its minimal and efficient setup costs, while MinIO is known for its easy and straightforward implementation. Users find Red Hat Ceph Storage reasonably priced and cost-effective, while MinIO offers flexible pricing options. Both products have fair and reasonable licensing structures., Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO both received positive returns on investment according to user feedback. Users expressed satisfaction with the cost-effectiveness and improved performance of Red Hat Ceph Storage. On the other hand, MinIO users highlighted the value and benefits they derived from using the product.
Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could improve in scalability, installation processes, documentation, GUI for management, performance, and troubleshooting capabilities. On the other hand, MinIO users suggest enhancements in performance, reliability, documentation, user interface, integration options, and feature set.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews for Red Hat Ceph Storage indicate varying time durations for deployment, setup, and implementation phases. In contrast, MinIO user reviews mention consistent timeframes for deployment and setup, with one user taking three months and another taking one week., Red Hat Ceph Storage is known for its knowledgeable and efficient customer service team, while MinIO has been praised for its exceptional assistance and dedication in providing prompt solutions. Both products prioritize customer satisfaction and smooth operations.
The summary above is based on 16 interviews we conducted recently with Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"I like that if you have a problem, you can buy the home server. It is stable and robust."
"It performs efficiently compared to other solutions."
"The product does save time for our company."
"The container installation features are good. The S3 feature provisions the storage buckets making it easy. It allows me to spin up the public buckets with open-source technology."
"The most valuable feature of MinIO is its ease of use, replication, and active directory. All the capabilities are in this solution."
"The initial setup was straightforward as MinIO provided good support documentation and took a couple of days to complete."
"This is an all-in-one, user-friendly data storage."
"Reliable erasure coding."
"What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug."
"The community support is very good."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
"Ceph has simplified my storage integration. I no longer need two or three storage systems, as Ceph can support all my storage needs. I no longer need OpenStack Swift for REST object storage access, I no longer need NFS or GlusterFS for filesystem sharing, and most importantly, I no longer need LVM or DRBD for my virtual machines in OpenStack."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"The Distributed User Interface (DUI) needs some work. It's hard to view a large set of data on the DUI. It's an issue with the DUI's performance."
"The developer support could be better."
"Limited storage provided in the free version."
"The only downside I see is that you do not have a complete picture of an object."
"The MinIO dashboard is minimal as there are only a couple of features inside the dashboard for a basic user. I would like this to be more robust with more click-around features."
"With problems, visibility is hard because everything is in containers. Difficult to get to the logs in order to figure out what the problem was."
"We had minor bugs occasionally."
"Lacks documentation for non-Kubernetes users."
"Some documentation is very hard to find."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"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."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
MinIO is ranked 1st in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews. MinIO is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of MinIO writes " A tool for storage purposes that helps businesses save time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". MinIO is most compared with NetApp StorageGRID, Dell ECS, Pure Storage FlashBlade, Cloudian HyperStore and SwiftStack, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade, NetApp StorageGRID and Dell ECS. See our MinIO 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.
