We performed a comparison between HPE Alletra and HPE StoreOnce 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."Pure FlashArray X NVMe helps to improve our processing speed. It is user-friendly and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The solution is very straightforward to set up."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reliability."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its ease of use and performance."
"The duplication algorithm allows us to get a lot more use out of less storage. We're running a five terabyte array right now and we're running probably about 30 terabytes on it. So the duplication rate is pretty phenomenal, without a cost to performance. It still runs pretty smoothly."
"The system allows for seamless learning experiences, facilitating quick and easy cloning of environments within minutes."
"The latency is good."
"The tool's notable feature is that we don't need to log a case directly with the vendor. The tool has access to all the logs on-premises. This is an on-premises solution. Additionally, we can provision data as thick or thin provisioned. Moreover, it includes data grid duplication and compression features."
"It offers rich features and high speed for transferring data."
"This is a user-friendly solution."
"It is very easy to implement."
"HPE StoreOnce works well, it is stable."
"HPE StoreOnce has high performance."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its catalyst mode, along with better performance, backup, and recovery."
"From a centralized system, I can manage the interface, the backup policies, and the status of the database."
"The important feature is compression and duplication. It has a good compression ratio and is very stable."
"The scalability is very good."
"We've seen that when we create a POD in synchronous mode, it increases the latency."
"If the customer only needs 500 terabytes and doesn't care how much data they'll put in the server, IBM is cheaper than Pure."
"Every time I think of something that needs to improve, they're one step ahead, which I love. The only area I wish to see improve, I believe is coming, is in the FlashBlade product. Blade implementation fell short on a few of the services."
"The software layer has to improve."
"We have run into a couple of instances recently where we are running out of space. So we have had to buy some more packs for it and they have deployed fine and it has increased smoothly."
"Efficiency improvements would always be welcome, but I'm not sure if they could get more efficient."
"Right now, the box itself is just strictly working as a backend storage system. It would be fantastic if we could access it directly like a NAS device through network access or SIS drives. I think they have an interface, but I am not sure how good it is. If we could address a box directly on the network without having to go through a server, it would be great. The replication schemas could be improved. We are not using replication on the storage level right now. We use a different type of replication. If their replication would be as good as the one that we have, I would probably run the replication schema because it might be faster, but I don't know that for a fact. So, I cannot say that they have good replication. All I can say is that they need to inform us better."
"I would like to see replication and DR features in the next release of this solution."
"It would be better if there were an option to incorporate the NVMe feature alongside other storage tiers. Currently, the system operates on Autotier but can manually peer and mix different types of drives, such as SAS and SATA drives."
"We had some issues while installing it on our servers. It required more resources while cross-checking. So, the initial setup process could be better."
"Cloud integration needs to be simplified."
"The product could be improved with better support for data protection."
"I would like to see better integration with Veeam software."
"One item I wanted to see is SSD drives as a cache, and that was, for a time, still lacking in StoreOnce, however, they have done it now. It's not available yet, however, it will be shortly."
"The solution's technical support should be faster."
"The user interface of HPE StoreOnce should be more user-friendly. Additionally, the configuration and troubleshooting could be better."
"The appliance doesn't have the global deduplication, it has StoreOnce deduplication. It does not deduplicate across the appliance, it will deduplicate in one particular store. With the global deduplication, I could store more data."
"This product would be improved with the inclusion of more features to security or WORM."
HPE Alletra is ranked 25th in All-Flash Storage with 2 reviews while HPE StoreOnce is ranked 2nd in Deduplication Software with 103 reviews. HPE Alletra is rated 9.0, while HPE StoreOnce is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HPE Alletra writes "Offers high-intensity IOPS for data operations and delivers extremely low latency for disk operations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HPE StoreOnce writes "Helps to consolidate D2D backups and has a good deduplication ratio". HPE Alletra is most compared with Dell PowerStore, HPE Primera, NetApp AFF and HPE 3PAR StoreServ, whereas HPE StoreOnce is most compared with Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Dell PowerVault, ExaGrid EX Series, DD Boost and Veeam Backup & Replication.
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.
