DataCore SANsymphony Reviews

We utilize the software-defined storage for our database systems and virtualization environments (we have multiple). One detail we utilize most is the HA provided by the vendor. We have two “legs” for connectivity to our SAN. This provides two logical locations in two physically separate data centers. This keeps our DBAs and admins happy. We can perform changes and updates on one side while the app (DB) data is accessible on the other. The data is synced almost instantly when both sides are up and operational. This allows us a lot of flexibility.

When you have to meet data latency and accessibility requirements you will need to look at this software offering. Our developers and DBAs require uptime and redundancy. This has improved our operational offering to our customers. The end-user finds it fast and reliable. The software works well no matter what storage vendor we put on the back end. We can check storage from startup ABD or price from vendor XYZ. This improves our flexibility and cost savings as we rely on the software and not on a product or manufacturer that locks us in.

Active-active is the most valuable aspect for us. The reason being, we can run our clusters on one side knowing our data is available in the other data center. There is simple management via GUI or command line. 

The software just works and is reliable. Downtime due to storage maintenance or upgrades is long gone. We have multiple types of software running to differentiate our applications. This gives us more value due to the fact that we can segment by application if needed. The bottom line is the software is what runs our applications on whatever storage vendor we choose - and it does so reliably.

One area the company can improve upon is the use of other software. Right now, the version used is run on Microsoft Windows Server. Having a Linux version or even an appliance would be better as it would eliminate the use of additional licensing for another piece of hardware. While the Windows server has gotten more reliable, I would like it more if it would not be dependent on Microsoft Windows Servers. 

Improving the GUI would be another feature where they could add to the software. They should make it more intuitive by simplifying the layout.

I have been working with the software for over five years. 

The software is very stable.

The scalability is very good. 

Customer support is hit or miss. There are good technicians, however, some are not so good.

Positive

We did not previously use a different solution. We have been using this software for some time now.

You may want to get professional services to start the setup if there are key features you want to be implemented.

We had a very good team implementation.

The software paid for itself long ago.

I'd advise users to do their homework. This software gives you good reliability and performance.

We did not evaluate other options.

I like the product and will continue to use it well into the future.

We exchanged our standard storage (conventional storage) with a software-defined solution. We wanted to use something that corresponds to the time, something modern and hardware-independent. 

We had many small problems, but with time, we were on the way. Only once did we have a total failure of the storage, and this was a bug in the software. 

The Disaster Recovery (DR) site helped us to recover the data. This was a one and only case and we were disappointed. In the end, we have two DataCore systems, a two-node system, and a three-node system. Over time I must say, we have been satisfied. It has advanced storage knowledge and good administrators.

DataCore SANsymphony is our main storage system. We were using it in combination with VMware vSphere. Each data store is mirrored; many critical data stores have a 3^rd mirror in their Disaster Recovery site. On the 3^rd mirror copy, we are using continuous protection. The data stores are set to get a maximum of 14 days. Some special data stores have additional snapshots to keep the full backups. We tried to use vFilo. However, this solution was not as good as the NetApp ONTAP software-defined version. I do not know what we will use in the future when choosing the next storage solution. Right now, we are split between NetApp and DataCore.

For us, fault tolerance is the most important feature of DataCore. 

Redundancy mechanisms, such as mirroring or parity, help maintain the integrity of stored data even if one or more components fail. This is essential for mission-critical applications and services that require continuous operation. In the event of a hardware failure or other disruptions, fault tolerant systems enable seamless and uninterrupted access to data, minimizing downtime and associated business impacts. This is especially critical in environments where any interruption in data access can result in significant financial or operational losses. Fault tolerance protects against the loss of data due to hardware failures, ensuring that critical information remains intact. The associated business disruptions can outweigh these initial investments.

The main problem is there is no DataCore OS itself; there is nothing better than one complete solution from one solution provider. We had a lot of issues. It was really disappointing to see that DataCore blamed Microsoft for the problems, Microsoft blamed Lenovo hardware, and Lenovo blamed Datacore.

DataCore should have an OS specifically designed and optimized for managing storage workloads. Only the storage system should have access to encryption and authentication mechanisms to safeguard stored data. The future DC system should be integrated with the DC Hardware, this will enhances interoperability and simplifies the deployment and management of all storage products.

I've used the solution for over ten years.

We did use a different solution; at the time, DataCore was more modern than other competitors.

Don’t do it on your own. You need someone with some DCSA experience and five or more years of experience.

We did not evaluate other options. We wanted DataCore.

This is not a solution for administrators without storage experience; however, if all requirements are met, it is very stable, fast, and flexible.

My primary use case for DataCore SANsymphony is SAN rapid storage for virtual machines and the high availability for infrastructure.

The feature I found most valuable was the high availability with mirroring.

There is room for improvement in the graphical interface. 

I have been using the DataCore solution for about 12 years.

My impression is that it is a very stable solution. However, I did have one encounter with this solution's crash as the result of a wrong action taken by a user. The crash resulted in some data being lost. We had to restore some data.

My opinion is that it's a very easy solution and that it's very scalable. I am very happy with this product's ability to adapt, increase, and modify existing infrastructures.

We have about 20 clients who are using this solution.

I would rate DataCore's technical support a nine, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. Each time I requested help, they would call me back in 20 minutes or less.

Positive

I think that the initial setup is quite simple.

The deployment of DataCore depends on many factors, but for us, it took about one day for each server.

The license is paid twice per year.

This solution is quite fluent and stable and very easy to administer and use. I would recommend it to other people.

We have two VMware servers attached to two DataCore SanSymphony servers. The two SanSymphony servers are in high availability. Each server has two NVMe cards and some SAS disk in RAID5. 

We use the auto-tiering function to manage the two kinds of storage and place the dormant blocks on the SAS disks. 

We also use the Continuous Data Protection function to protect our volumes against crypto lockers, for example. 

The solution allows us to have real Business Continuity Planning on our storage system.

DataCore SanSymphony helps us to have a real performant and secure storage system. We can use the storage technology of our choice because SanSymphony can manage any storage that Windows accept.

The solution helps us to protect the data with the high availability function, which synchronizes in real-time the block between the servers. The continuous data protection function can log all the changes on the storage to allow us to go back in time within the last 72 hours.

We thought about replacing our two VMware servers and the two DataCore servers with the hyper-converged DataCore solution. 

The first valuable aspect is the software-defined storage. We like the fact that we are not dependent on a constructor. We can mix them as we wish. We can also mix the storage class as we want. 

The second thing we like is the cache which is the RAM of the server so we can choose the cache we need and we want. It provides us with a real performance for the writers but also for the readers.

Next, today, Continuous Data protection is mandatory for us. These days, with the multiplication of crypto lockers, we are more confident in the protection of our data.

It's difficult to say if something is missing in this solution. Maybe we'd like to manage the raid on the disk directly in SanSymphony. 

We essentially use RAID5 for our SAS disk and SSD, and now we need to create this RAID on the raid card. If we could bypass this card, we could really manage all the storage from the solution, which would be ideal.

The graphical interface needs to be improved. We have noticed some bugs in it.

A vCenter integration just appeared in the last version. However, we have only some functions within it. I am confident that many new things will arrive in the next few months to make it more robust.

I have been using this solution for 14 years.

I found the solution to be very stable.

The scalability is very good; we can add a disk or RAM if we need it.

The support is very good. They are fast and efficient.

Positive

We used EMC SAN. We switch due to the fact that, at the time, there was not high availability on the EMC side and the management of the storage was simpler.

The initial setup is very simple; there is a wizard to help you deploy the solution. 

I implemented the solution myself.

We evaluated EMC's MirrorView and recently Huawei with Dorado Hypermetro.

• We use DataCore SANsymphony as our primary storage solution replicated on two hosts since October 2012. In July 2018, we dispatched them to the two server rooms.
• Each DataCore node consists of a server and two storage bays connected in SAS.
• We use this SAN to store our VMware datastore (300 virtual machines) for our 10 ESXi servers.
• Each server is connected to storage via two fiber channel links 8Gbps.

Previously, we had some Windows and Linux servers with direct-attached storage. Our server's farm increases faster than our server room. So, we thought about virtualizing our applications. We chose to use VMware ESXi and DataCore SANsymphony to create our new infrastructure and then began to deploy our infrastructure on one server room. Then in 2018, we chose to dispatch them for more security in two server rooms.

• The better features are the synchronous replication and the management console.
• The synchronous replication gives us the ability to make business continuity planning.
• I like the management console which is very easy to use.

DataCore is currently working with Veeam software for a better integration; this is my only desired missing feature today.

With this feature, Veeam do a snapshot on Virtual Machine, then snapshot the storage.
When storage snapshot is done, Veeam remove the Virtual Machine snapshot to avoid long period snapshot.
With a VMware snapshot period smaller, consolidate will be faster and production will be less impacted.
Then Veeam save VMs directly from storage snapshot without VM performance impact.

When Backup Job is done, veeam ask to Datacore to remove Storage snapshot without any VM interruption or impact performance.

The primary use case is the provisioning of high-performance and redundant storage for our VMware platform. With the help of auto-tiering, the data lands on the optimal storage tier for it. Furthermore, integration into the backup system is very important to us. We use Veeam B&R, which, with SANsymphony integration, is able to work much more efficiently via storage snapshots. 

We use SANsymphony within a data center distributed over two locations. This was very easy to implement. This also includes settings that optimize the data traffic between the locations.

With SANsymphony, we were able to set up fully redundant storage across two locations. We use SANsymphony as the main storage for our cloud and dedicated customer environments. 

We were impressed by the integration into virtualization and the backup system. SANsymphony integrates seamlessly into our VMware platforms. Auto-tiering enables us to keep the storage content on the optimal storage tier easily. 

Synchronous mirroring ensures very high availability for us and our customers. In the event of maintenance or failure, an automatic failover takes place. The automatic failback is the cherry on top of the cake.

Integration with Veeam Backup & Replication has enabled us to improve our backup infrastructure significantly. 

The use of storage snapshots and backup via Fibre Channel reduces the load on the productive infrastructure.

It is the sum of the many, often outstanding, individual functions that help us to ensure economical and safe operation for us and our customers. The most important functions for us are

The synchronous mirror allows us to operate a fully redundant storage solution that is distributed across two sites. It can even cover the failure of an entire site. This also benefits us during complex maintenance work, as no downtime is required.

Auto-tiering enables us to store the data on the storage tier that is optimal for it. This also works within a vDisk, so old or cold data ends up on cheaper data carriers than the new or hot data accessed more frequently.

SANsymphony is being continuously developed. This makes it easier for us to respond to new challenges.

I see potential here in the support of NVMeoF, both as a target and in the backend. In addition, there should be new ways to improve the redundancy of the pools created with it - e.g. through extended RAID functionality (RAID5 or RAID6) or erasure coding.

Management could be improved. The management console sometimes reacts very slowly.

In the area of the HCI solution, I could imagine a different mode of operation. For example, a group of servers form a pool in which the data can be stored. 

Protection could also be guaranteed here via replication and erasure coding.

We have been using Datacore SANsymphony since 2007.

The systems are very stable. No great administrative effort is required to keep the system in good condition. Provided it is well-sized, it optimizes itself.

SANsymphony is very adaptable. Increasing the storage capacity and/or improving performance through faster systems in the backend are no problem.

Datacore support is one of the best in the industry. They offer a fast response and competent answers or even remote sessions. Support is always available 24/7/365.

Positive

We used StoreAge SVM with Dothill storage systems. 

SANsymphony has more and better functions. The TCO is also better.

The setup is quite simple if you are familiar with the storage environment. Certification as a DCIE is required. This ensures that you are sufficiently familiar with the system to install and administer it.

We did implement it in-house.

I can't give an exact ROI. The stability, availability, and performance pay for themselves immediately.

Good sizing is the basis for a stable and high-performance environment. It is important to plan in sufficient reserves.

It can make sense to license a higher number of TB if this puts you in a better price category.

We did not evaluate other options.

SANsymphony is best in class. It's flexible, like a Swiss army knife.

Usually, our clients want to replace some storage units from NetApp. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't because NetApp still has some features that DataCore SANsymphony would like to have.

DataCore SANsymphony's stability is okay.

DataCore SANsymphony should integrate file servers at a good price into the solution. The licensing is expensive, and you cannot manage a big file server with DataCore SANsymphony without paying a lot of money. NetApp is easier to sell, and we have had projects where NetApp was a lot cheaper than DataCore.

Our customers want their block storage to be fast, redundant, and highly available. You also might have a large fire storage for data that the customer does not need to access urgently. When you want to enclose this in the DataCore architecture, you have to pay the full amount of money as with block storage, which can be very expensive. Sometimes, it is very expensive to use DataCore SANsymphony.

I have been using DataCore SANsymphony for about one year.

I didn't notice any problems with the solution's stability. DataCore SANsymphony's stability is okay.

The first installation of DataCore SANsymphony took a long time. I am not sure if that was due to a lack of experience or software issues, as I was part of the sales team. I am not mounting DataCore SANsymphony. I am just selling the solution to the customers.

I rate DataCore SANsymphony a seven out of ten for stability.

You can scale DataCore SANsymphony as much as you want if you are willing to pay the price. The solution’s scalability is high and theoretically has no limit.

We won three or four projects last year but also lost some. In some cases, the decision was to go back to maintaining NetApp. Our clients are enterprise businesses.

I rate DataCore SANsymphony a six out of ten for scalability.

I have to contact the sales team and system engineers. I'm quite content with DataCore SANsymphony's system engineers.

Positive

I am not completely satisfied with the initial setup. I rate DataCore SANsymphony a five out of ten for its initial setup.

DataCore SANsymphony’s deployment takes around eight weeks.

DataCore SANsymphony's pricing is very high and should be much cheaper. You buy a license of DataCore SANsymphony, and then you have to add three or four times the price in hardware.

You have several SLAs. You have to buy the hardware equipment because DataCore SANsymphony doesn't run independently but on server hardware.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate DataCore SANsymphony's pricing a seven or eight out of ten.

We sell DataCore with the package that permits to use the latest version. We wouldn’t install another version.

NetApp is very good compared to DataCore SANsymphony in terms of flexibility and licensing.

I don’t know. I would ask them to compare.

DataCore SANsymphony is a good product, but there's room for improvement.

Overall, I rate DataCore SANsymphony a seven out of ten.

I am an infrastructure engineer for a partner and 95% of the infrastructure that I recommend and/or install and maintain for my clients are based on the triptych: SANsymphony/vSphere/Veeam.

I have often succeeded in convincing clients to add security to their storage by replacing an old single-site infrastructure while providing a Business Continuity Plan solution.

Of all the customers where I installed the DataCore solution, only one decided not to keep it; however, it was for reasons of political strategy following a change of CIO.

The main feedback from my customers concerns the performance of the DataCore SANsymphony - thanks to the embedded Auto-tiering technology which avoids users purchasing an expensive physical storage when the majority of their data is no longer active beyond a few weeks and do not need to be stored.

They have a quality support team, which offers assistance in French when necessary (particularly for Public Service customers who do not speak English fluently). They respond very quickly to engage with any serious problems encountered.

Auto-tiering to obtain performance at a lower cost without the customer having to purchase ultra-fast storage is great. The ease of increasing the volume of storage without interruption of services and without impact on users is helpful. At the same time, they are leaving the choice to adapt storage technology according to a user’s needs. The abstraction of the hardware layer, especially when it is necessary to change the brand and/or model of equipment during infrastructure renewal is good. The possibility of installing the solution in HCI mode for small structures makes it possible to address large accounts as well as small businesses.

I would like to see SMPA (Shared Multi-Port Array) technology developed with the aim of allowing a configuration identical to other storage arrays: instead of having a single storage controller per site, competing arrays all have 2 controllers for redundancy and securing data access (3Par, Unity, MSA, etc.) It would be necessary to automate the operation of two nodes managing the same storage per site and no longer be obliged to manage it by a system of scripts which must be revalidated each time the product is updated.

I've used the solution since 2002.

There will always be problems with a software solution; the responsiveness of the support and developers allows them to be corrected very quickly, and even sometimes individually, in relation to a specific problem for a particular client.

In the majority of cases, the failures that I encountered with my clients had their origin in one of the other components of the infrastructure (hypervisors or switches).

Scalability is one of the many advantages, as the evolution of the solution is simple and does not interrupt services.

Of all the software that I use in my job, it is the one that has the best support. When the problem is not with DataCore, they often help me and sometimes even directly provide the solution to modify the settings on the other components of the infrastructure causing the problem.

Positive

Sometimes some customers use other storage solutions, but whenever possible; I advise them to switch to DataCore

The initial training and accompanying certification made it simple and practical to implement the solution.

I am not able to answer for my clients; however, as long as they do not move to another solution, their ROI should correspond to their expectations.

Most of the time, it is easy to prove that in the long term, this solution is the most advantageous for the client cost-wise; both in terms of equipment renewal and ease of handling.

When I started proposing and installing, I only knew about traditional infrastructures that did not provide security at the data level.

My professional career will end soon; however, as long as the product is available, I will continue to recommend it to more and more new customers and maintain it among those who continue to use it.