We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and StarWind HyperConverged Appliance based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."
"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"We also substantially reduced network complexity by eliminating that standalone SAN. That reduced complexity has allowed us to concentrate on improving other areas of our network."
"Their service is top-notch and if a node goes down they immediately are following up with us to make sure that everything is working smoothly."
"Servers came pre-configured for our environment and as soon as they were in the rack, Starwind got them up and running."
"The option to deploy a hyper-converged system without an expensive storage switch was a benefit."
"The most valuable aspect of StarWind is the all-in-one solution that they provide."
"It is a safe, fast, and cost-effective storage system that improved our systems to have zero downtime."
"Having this all backed up by pro-active support gives us good peace of mind."
"The hardware footprint is great. We've got two 2U servers which replaced four 2U servers. Granted, they were about three years old at that point, but we actually increased our processing capacity by about 50 percent while keeping our storage capacity about the same. We've actually been able to downgrade to a half rack from a full rack because we've gotten rid of some of our network equipment and some of our additional storage arrays."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"The only thing my team has recommended improving on is possibly a StarWind-customized GUI to monitor the overall system health, similar to 5nine Manager."
"The only issues are when Hyper V itself has limitations and I'd love to see support or enhancement in the area of direct-attached GPU cards."
"There is room for improvement in the setup and installation phase. We had massive problems connecting the StarWind appliances to our network infrastructure. That wasn't necessarily a StarWind problem. I don't know if their business partner in the UK wasn't used to having to deal with the supply of the cabling infrastructure, but that's where the problems started."
"Although the setup documentation was very complete and succinct, I found StarWind documentation to be a bit sparse."
"I honestly cannot think of anything else to be improved, as I rarely have to interact with the Starwind product."
"I'd like a better UI and some limitations on "breaking it.""
"Product shipments did have a few bumps along the way, but that's to be expected when using any shipping company."
"It would be nice to have some kind of GUI interface implemented to give you an overall view of the system's health at a glance."
More StarWind HyperConverged Appliance Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews while StarWind HyperConverged Appliance is ranked 5th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 65 reviews. Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2, while StarWind HyperConverged Appliance is rated 9.6. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". On the other hand, the top reviewer of StarWind HyperConverged Appliance writes "Straightforward to use with good remote management and a simple GUI". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and NetApp StorageGRID, whereas StarWind HyperConverged Appliance is most compared with Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), VMware vSAN, Dell PowerFlex, VxRail and HPE SimpliVity. See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StarWind HyperConverged Appliance report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.
