We performed a comparison between Portworx Enterprise and Red Hat Ceph Storage 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."The solution is user-friendly."
"Portworx virtualizes the aspects of the underlying block storage. That is good because they can also use block storage for their future deployment instead of just NFS."
"A custom IBM script is designed to tackle the storage management challenges within containerized environments, providing crucial data services and features required for enterprise applications."
"Portworx is a simple solution. It's similar to Pure Storage products. They're all easy to use and install. You need to have a little expertise with containers to use Portworx, but it will be no problem for you if you understand containers."
"The best thing about Portworx is the Stork, they have called the VPS (Volume Replacement Strategy) and they also have topology awareness, and these are the three features I like."
"I like that you have a small dedicated file system that is fast and resilient for containerized workloads."
"The community support is very good."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers). We didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server/disk failures."
"We use the solution for cloud storage."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"The integration has room for improvement."
"They have not integrated Portworx with Ondat since they are too focused now on Pure Storage APIs and not on users like us."
"I would like to see a more native mapping to mainframe-type systems."
"The documentation could be better."
"It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately."
"I think the vendor could provide more training for new users who may not be familiar with containers."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"Some documentation is very hard to find."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
Portworx Enterprise is ranked 2nd in Cloud Software Defined Storage with 6 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews. Portworx Enterprise is rated 9.2, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Portworx Enterprise writes "A solution backed by strong customer support, that is stable and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". Portworx Enterprise is most compared with Red Hat Openshift Data Foundation, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, IBM Spectrum Scale, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) and Robin Cloud Native Storage for Kubernetes, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Pure Storage FlashBlade, NetApp StorageGRID and Dell ECS. See our Portworx Enterprise vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors and best Cloud Software Defined Storage 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.