We performed a comparison between Tintri VMstore and VMware vSAN 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."Its array houses our entire production environment."
"We consume less physical storage because of the solution’s deduplication and compression."
"We also like the compactness, the small footprint. It takes up very little space in a data center and uses little power."
"The most valuable feature is it never goes down. We can expand and create volumes."
"The most valuable feature is its upgradeability."
"We've had different types of storage, and three things of this solution are valuable. The first one is its outstanding performance. The second one is its stability. In the about three years that we've had it, we've had component failures, but we never had a service interruption or any data loss. The third one, which is really critical, is that it is super easy to use in terms of provisioning, storage, and managing the arrays. I'm able to maintain a multi-site environment with a couple of dozen arrays with a single mid-level storage admin."
"They are quite responsive and our local team was pretty good."
"The most valuable features of Pure Storage FlashArray are management and administration user-friendliness, provisioning, and performance."
"A very good support team that is available 24/7. They have real technical staff with strong knowledge."
"Tintri VMstore is rock solid. We have not had a single issue with stability. It is also very low maintenance allowing us to concentrate on project work."
"Its speed has been absolutely fantastic."
"It is fast and reliable. There hasn’t been a single failure in three years of use."
"Upgrades are super easy and can be done during business hours without interruptions in production."
"Simplicity of installation and management, high IOPS, management per VM, QoS, power and space saving."
"The data encryption feature adds a valuable security enhancement with no impact on performance."
"We love the real-time replication, ease of use when connecting our servers to the storage, and the level of redundancy inside the box... It's also simple software and integrates well with VMware so we get a lot of information about all of the VMs, how they're performing individually, and about network latency. That's very helpful when you're troubleshooting a slowdown."
"The ability to have a disaster recovery option for our end-users by being able to use VDI and the vSANs, and the ability to do replication across multiple data centers, are valuable to us."
"It is easier to deploy than the traditional SAN."
"The most valuable feature is that it is software-defined storage. Also, being able to do maintenance on the fly is a real benefit: migrating off, updating, and then moving the guest back on to the nodes."
"The flexibility is most valuable. Being able to manage things quickly if something goes wrong is also valuable. Very recently, we had one node that went down due to a power problem, but there was really no major impact on the systems running on top of it."
"The most valuable features are its performance, simplicity, and synchronicity with vSphere."
"The product's initial setup phase is simple."
"It completely removes the need for a storage network and for a storage administrator and all of that infrastructure and the costs that are involved with them."
"The most valuable features are Erasure Coding, Deduplication and Compression, and the advancement in stretching regarding replication."
"If they could make it cheaper, that would be something."
"The initial setup of the product is complex."
"Currently, the solution fails to support file screening."
"I feel like there is too much automation; the user doesn't have any manual input."
"As partners, we should have the option to download the software, rather than have to go back through Pure to obtain it."
"CIFS and SMB Shares cannot be mounted directly."
"It would be nice if Pure had something in its portfolio that provided higher deduplication and compression for backups."
"The scalability of the solution is not as good as it probably could be."
"The product could be improved by adding iSCSI support. We have had to rethink how we implement some of our services due to this."
"Active/active cluster between two Tintris on Hyper-V cluster."
"Tintri need to be able to innovate faster but maintain the quality of their features."
"I would like to be able to add more storage capacity to our 2 units down the road with out buying an additional seprate array."
"Their current replication is really just enough to "check the box" that they do replication. We'll probably implement Actifio, Zerto or EMC RecoverPoint for VMs for more critical data replication."
"The Tintri OS and GlobalCenter software do a great job of showing you troubled VMs, however it still could be a bit more helpful in diagnosing the issues."
"On the software side, I suggest adding integration with backups software like CommVault Simpana or Veeam where these products can integrate with the array and trigger things like snapshots for backup, etc."
"Speed of our VDI machines. We have a very high log in and log out ratio and machines are being refreshed instantly so we have a constant boot storm on our storage."
"he list of hardware supported should be increased in the future."
"Ease of administration is one area where vSAN could be improved."
"Perhaps they could provide encryption without having to use an encryption manager."
"VMware vSAN needs to improve its features because other solutions have more advanced features."
"If one node out of your ten nodes fails, it takes a lot of time to replicate and rebalance VMware vSAN. This time can be reduced. When a node fails and the data is not accessible, vSAN has to be rebalanced to make the redundancy level of two again. However, if it is taking a lot of time and any other hardware fails during that time, then we have a problem. Two disk failures mean that all data will be lost, and we may have to recover it from the backup. So, the number of threads that run to do the rebalancing could be more so that the time taken to make it fully redundant again is not so much."
"I would like to see some of the more traditional SAN functions that are out the now. I can list them: being able to Snapshot on the back-end, better de-dupe, and better compression. Those are the major ones."
"Improvements can be made with respect to scalability."
"Based on my testing, I would like to expand deduplication to include hybrid deployments and not just for all-flash deployments."
Tintri VMstore is ranked 15th in All-Flash Storage with 61 reviews while VMware vSAN is ranked 3rd in HCI with 226 reviews. Tintri VMstore is rated 9.4, while VMware vSAN is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Tintri VMstore writes "We were able to push a button—it really is that simple—and flip primary and secondary storage locations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSAN writes "Very stable, easy to set up, and easy to use". Tintri VMstore is most compared with Dell PowerStore, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF, DDN IntelliFlash and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), whereas VMware vSAN is most compared with VxRail, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, HPE SimpliVity, Red Hat Ceph Storage and NetApp AFF.
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.