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."It has made working with storage as easy and simple as it should be."
"The performance of the storage is just unbelievable."
"It has been very stable. I have not seen or heard of downtime storage issues after moving over to it."
"I like the speed, and I like the API and how programmable it is."
"The deduplication and compression rates are beyond impressive."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are management and administration user-friendliness, provisioning, and performance."
"Pure is simple to set up and manage on a day-to-day basis."
"Processes that used to take 40 minutes to two hours can be completed in five minutes."
"Reduxio delivers a self-contained system with all of the features rolled in and functional."
"It's very intuitive, has a very modern interface. Instead of making the user set up a million parameters for things that the system knows better anyway, they put all the intelligence in the product and made the controls much easier."
"Ease of user interface: prevents distractions and confusion when dealing with real-time catastrophes and high-pressure situations. Overall, it extremely easy to use. My team was trained within less than two hours."
"Immediate data recovery: critical to business continuity in an age of unknown cyber threats."
"The whole product is based on point-in-time restore capabilities built into their storage appliance, and no one else I know does that."
"Takes advantage of deduplication and compression through as much of the content of VMs which are similar."
"The unit has been running at 100% without an issue."
"We are enjoying a quantum leap in speed, reliability, and available space with this system."
"If we get complaints about any kind of performance metric issues, whether it's storage related or something on the virtual side, we use it to pinpoint what the actual issue is."
"It's got full API functionality and the performance is pretty steady."
"The simplicity of it."
"If you buy the solution for its specific purpose it will work well."
"Overall performance of the solution."
"The scalability and being able to implement it quickly."
"The dashboard is such that you don't need to be a storage expert to administer it."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its scalability."
"There's always an opportunity for new feature functionality."
"The credentials on the iSCSI interface are only available to type in with the Chrome browser, and not with the Firefox browser."
"I recognize it's a difficult challenge, but I would like to see them make the pricing more reasonable."
"I would like to see more cloud integration."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I would like the ability to swap out the network adapters into it. So, without taking out the whole controller, I would like to be able to swap adapters. This would make things easier."
"A centralized management would be nice, the ability to manage all cluster in one management portal."
"Would love to have role-based access and an active directory integration."
"The latest release limits web access to the admin console via Chrome only, and that's a bit of a hassle. Would definitely prefer something less restrictive there."
"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."
"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."
"They're trying to do this, but they need to show more what their growth plan is, the development, what the next steps are, the future."
"Needs some hooks into cloud storage for backup. Also they should update the system to use additional secondary storage as a resource."
"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."
"The technical support is really bad and has to be improved."
"We are looking for, potentially, on the Active IQ reporting side, to do reporting based on the datastore. Right now, I can report on the whole SolidFire, or I can report on just a certain datastore or a volume. I'd like to take all of my VDI infrastructure, which as an example would be multiple datastores."
"They could make the mNode more user-friendly. Now you need to configure and add nodes by CLI and it’s not really easy to manage. If they created a web interface to do the management of the mNode, that would be great!."
"This solution would be improved if it were made to be more compatible with other products."
"So feature-wise, I would say more reporting tools that could be merged into it."
"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."
"For example, the ease of use with the reporting. Right now it's not impossible, but you have to know Sequel. It's a little time consuming to get those customized reports in there."
"The inclusion of more protocols and interfaces would make it easier to integrate with other products."
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.
