We performed a comparison between Reduxio [EOL] and SolidFire 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."Data deduplication features make it easier to manage storage and forecast growth."
"We consume less physical storage because of the solution’s deduplication and compression."
"The most valuable feature is replication."
"It is easy to manage. You don't have to have the same people who used to manage the Dell EMC arrays because the solution is more intuitive."
"We were actually able to do multiple upgrades, including head upgrades and moving between the platforms, M20 and M50, over the years. We have never once lost a ping and have never had an outage due to an OS upgrade or a complete head upgrade."
"Before we used Pure Storage it took 93 days of employees who run the database to back up and restore databases. The scale of deployment basically went from several days to a few minutes."
"It reduces space and the polar consumption. It also accelerates the application."
"All our junior partners can administer the storage arrays. It is simple and easy to use. We don't have to dedicate a whole team of full time people to work on it."
"We were also pleased to learn that Reduxio also has, beside dedup and compression that actually works, the "time machine" built in, which allows you to go back a few seconds or a few minutes before a ransomware attack gets you."
"Takes advantage of deduplication and compression through as much of the content of VMs which are similar."
"One of the beautiful parts about it is the whole user interface. It's almost too simple. As an IT professional, you think, "Where are the works, how am I assured that this is actually protecting my data?" The ease of use in terms of deployment, and also the metrics that it feeds back to you are also among the many attractive features of the whole platform."
"The pre-processing dedupe engine they have instead of post-processing."
"Efficiency of data management (Tier-X tiering, and NoDup inline dedupliclation and compression) provide for quick response time (+150k IOPS) during regular usage."
"In terms of deployment and also data storage, the deduplication ability of it has reduced that footprint."
"Reduxio requires zero upfront setup for backups. I get backups every single second for as long as I want with zero impact to performance."
"In terms of ease of use, the GUI is quite amazing and seems to be taken from a computer game. Literally within 30 minutes, we had learned almost everything there is on the management UI and started managing the device."
"The square footage for doing development is at a premium when dealing with government networks. To be able to put a lot of IOPS in a lot of high-speed performing drives in a very small location which requires very little HVAC with very little power, it is very valuable to us."
"SolidFire provides seamless performance across your storage system when you need to scale up. Other storage systems do not do that."
"SolidFire has seamless performance for the nodes and extensions. I also like the tool’s scalability. The product’s performance does not get affected when we scale either up or down. This is not the case with other products."
"We can add a node, we add compute, we add storage, and we've had really good luck with that."
"It's a very compact device. For a medium-sized business, it's very helpful because the device is efficient and very fast."
"The scalability and being able to implement it quickly."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It is very easy to scale up SolidFire."
"Data reduction is an area that needs improvement. There is a garbage collection service that runs but during that time, system utilization increases."
"Self-backup is the only feature lacking in this solution."
"The product should improve its response time. I have also encountered issues with its configuration."
"I can't see where they can make anything better, unless, of course, they lower their prices even more."
"The price of Pure Storage FlashArray could be better."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup."
"The initial setup was a little complex. We had some initial issues with the design and had to help correct some of the white papers for it, but it wasn't your standard use case."
"The solution is not cheap."
"I would love to see deeper integration with VMware vSphere/vCenter. Right now, I can edit existing Reduxio datastore sizes in the vSphere web client. Provisioning new datastores that way would be nice."
"We had a single failure of the device but believe that it was tied to the server losing contact with our NTP server due to DNS issues. As Reduxio is very time-dependent, losing sync made the entire array unstable."
"Integration is needed with other virtual vendors like VMware, Veeam, Hyper-V; that integration needs to be deeper, not just the way that they're using it now. I know that it's under development, but I think this is one of the disadvantages, for now, as a young company. They have to work with the other players on the market."
"I am waiting on a feature set in the new version which should allow me to replicate between Reduxio iSCSI SANs for disaster recovery and also to 3rd party iSCSI SANs which are cheaper for an archive or DR target."
"The only critique that we have is it needs the ability to have local users added. You have to log in as one built-in admin account. You can't create your own."
"We had a brief hiccup, a brief outage, during one upgrade process, but it wasn't too extreme."
"Scalability is a little unusual. We came from the NetApp world where, if you needed more disk space, you just added more drives into the chassis, whereas with Reduxio, if you need more disk space, you have to buy a new chassis."
"The ability to look at data at a file level would be useful, as well as the ability recover at that level. Right now, you can only recover whole volumes."
"They could do a file-based NAS: SolidFire NAS-based. It's probably not its niche, but that is our direction, not to use block, and it's block. Solid state block is what it is."
"The upgrade process could be better."
"When you set up the nodes, we have to serial into each one of these nodes to configure the IP ranges. It's still very easy, but it's time consuming."
"It's a very good Windows-type solution. But we do a lot of legacy systems and the like. So it's getting that incorporated into it that would help us."
"One of the challenges we faced while using SolidFire was that the product line that we were using in our company was discontinued."
"So feature-wise, I would say more reporting tools that could be merged into it."
"This solution would be improved if it were made to be more compatible with other products."
"We had some false positives, power supplies failing, and that's really been about it. We had a couple of glitches during some upgrade processes but nothing that was really concerning to us."
Earn 20 points
Reduxio [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage while SolidFire is ranked 19th in All-Flash Storage with 33 reviews. Reduxio [EOL] is rated 9.8, while SolidFire is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Reduxio [EOL] writes "Its access speed and now its recently released features makes Reduxio not only an equal, but also better than your older version SANs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolidFire writes "A versatile storage solution suitable for various workloads in cloud environments providing scalable architecture, granular Quality of Service and consistent performance". Reduxio [EOL] is most compared with , whereas SolidFire is most compared with NetApp AFF, Dell PowerStore 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.