We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and VMware vSAN 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 have not encountered any stability issues for the product."
"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."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"Technical support is good."
"it's easy to scale, it's easy to predict IOP needs, and you can design for low latency using all-flash... Also, for setting up new clusters for VDI quickly, it's nice. You don't have to wait on an order for a storage vendor to ship you a system and help you configure it, you do it all yourself. And the sizing guides are pretty straightforward."
"The performance has exceeded our expectations and exceeded our traditional converged infrastructure."
"The product’s most valuable features are performance and expandability."
"The ability to have a disaster recovery option for our end-users by being able to use VDI and the vSANs, and the ability to do replication across multiple data centers, are valuable to us."
"It is very easy to set up and very easy to use. It is very useful."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Data management and recovery processes are the most valuable features."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"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."
"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."
"There are certain shortcomings in the stability of the product where improvements are required."
"There's a lot that can be done to segregate. That may be available now in vSAN 7, I suppose, however, the deduplication and compression can be segregated."
"I would love to see vSAN integrate Persistent Memory and NVDIMMs. I know they're supposed to be working on an elastic tier so that we don't have the issues with destaging from the cache to the capacity. Those are the things that I'm interested in."
"The biggest room for improvement I see in vSAN is the lack of SAN connectivity. I've kind of joked around that there is no "SAN" in vSAN. And it's something that we've worked to try and introduce some options for, and we're going to continue to work towards that."
"They should provide Deduplication and Compression over the hybrid drives."
"he list of hardware supported should be increased in the future."
"The interface is a little complicated, it could be simplified with more graphical gadgets. We have many servers, and the built-in functions, such as rate configuration, are a bit complex."
"Based on my testing, I would like to expand deduplication to include hybrid deployments and not just for all-flash deployments."
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews while VMware vSAN is ranked 2nd in HCI with 227 reviews. Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2, while VMware vSAN is rated 8.4. 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 VMware vSAN writes "Very stable, easy to set up, and easy to use". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade, NetApp StorageGRID and Dell ECS, whereas VMware vSAN is most compared with VxRail, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, HPE SimpliVity, Dell PowerFlex and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI). See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. VMware vSAN report.
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.
