We performed a comparison between HPE 3PAR StoreServ and Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The technical support is very good."
"The compression features are good."
"We have additional space in the enclosures for additional disks, so we can scale up without any downtime."
"It is a rugged, performance system; it is trouble-free and a workhorse."
"The speed is very good."
"There's a lot of good features. HPE 3PAR StoreServ is similar to Dell EMC. It is a high-speed system with automatic failover/failback, integrated with Microsoft Hyper-V and VMware. These are the main reason for choosing HPE 3PAR StoreServ in Denmark. We have a very good consulting service together with the product."
"3PAR is different from other storage solutions because it uses a chunklet when we initiate the storage. Every disk is submitted as a 1 GB chunklet. This chunklet can be RAID 1, 4, 5, or 6. This fabulous feature is very useful for me because I can distribute the RAID for any volume. The adaptive optimization is the biggest feature in 3PAR. 3PAR is very usable with thin volume because it detects zeros while writing. Every time I tell the hypervisor to make the full provisioning, it makes the volume as simple provisioning in 3PAR, not full provisioning. Other vendors take this volume as thick provisioning because of which the capacity is reached quickly. It doesn't happen in 3PAR because it detects zeros. It only writes the data, and it doesn't write zeros. There are two processors in 3PAR: the ASIC processor and the main processor. The ASIC processor detects zero writing and doesn't write it, which is a big feature in 3PAR."
"The solution is stable."
"I like its storage capacity, quick access to the data, speed, and overall storage management."
"It would also help if they integrate current technologies, newer technologies, and more efficient technologies, as time progresses. For example, integrate the fourth level of NAND devices."
"I would like to see more cloud-based integrations and more file storage capabilities."
"If HPE 3PAR could handle NAS and all things related to NAS, you would not need to have a mixture of different storages, storage boxes, one solution could fit all."
"File Persona can be better. I don't use File Persona because it has many problems with my environment. The antivirus that it has is not compatible with File Persona, and that's a big issue with File Persona. 3PAR is not as good as Dell when making a file in the storage. 3PAR for a block is very good, but when comparing row capacity, I get 14% capacity with 3PAR, but with Dell, I get 60% capacity."
"Upgrades could be improved. We would like to see more upgrades."
"HPE 3PAR StoreServ has limited flexibility in building replication solutions. There are limitations to the number of IOPS the system can do. It's not bad as it is doing its job. However, for the application, if you need a toolbox, you can build everything concerning periodic replication modes of synchronous or asynchronous three-site, four-site, with supported cascading which requires you to buy an IBM product. It also takes a few hours to one day to upgrade the system and sometimes; it takes more time because, in some HPE 3PAR StoreServ 20000 Storage, you have an eight-node system. If you do an upgrade, you do it node by node and every node might take more than an hour."
"While the stability is pretty good, it could always be improved upon."
"We are using a built-in solution in 3PAR. We are using All-Flash Storage, and there are some difficulties with it. HPE has now developed a new tool system to support All-Flash, and that's why we are changing our investment. They must increase its performance. I want unlimited support, which is very important for performance. I am not interested in spinning disks. HPE is developing new storage systems called Primera, but they must be developed more."
"The main thing Oracle can improve is the cost. It would be better if Oracle opened up the system to enable integration with other vendors. Whether it's the database, application server, or storage appliance, they should make it easy to integrate them. They need to open up more to ensure that it can work in any environment and IT ecosystem."
More Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
HPE 3PAR StoreServ is ranked 3rd in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 299 reviews while Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance is ranked 8th in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network). HPE 3PAR StoreServ is rated 8.6, while Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of HPE 3PAR StoreServ writes "The product's technical support is outstanding as I can reach someone right away". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance writes "A stable unified storage system that enables quick access to data". HPE 3PAR StoreServ is most compared with HPE Primera, Dell Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, NetApp AFF and HPE StorageWorks MSA, whereas Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance is most compared with NetApp FAS Series, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), IBM FlashSystem, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform and HPE StorageWorks MSA. See our HPE 3PAR StoreServ vs. Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance report.
See our list of best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors.
We monitor all Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
