We performed a comparison between NetApp StorageGRID, Red Hat Ceph Storage, and Scality RING based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about MinIO, Dell Technologies, Red Hat and others in File and Object Storage."Right now, we have an older StorageGRID. I like that we can grow it."
"It has improved our operational efficiency through time consumption and logistics by 40 to 50 percent. Everything that had to do with our legacy tape solution has been improved and is now more efficient."
"It has enabled us to save money on storage costs. We removed our tape library."
"It improves our operational efficiency."
"The feature of StorageGRID that I find most valuable for ensuring data durability and protection is its Information Lifecycle Management functionality."
"Cost-effective and easy to deploy."
"The ability to get to the StorageGRID from anywhere on my network. The solution is remote. You don't have to be at a physical location."
"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"High reliability with commodity hardware."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Scality RING8 is its performance and good interface."
"I think it's the economic factor. This solution has the lowest cost for storage systems."
"Another feature I like is the life cycle management that helps me with data storage efficiency."
"The only real issue that we have run into is, when we are cloning, we cannot do a thin provision clone, it has to be a full clone."
"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."
"One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes."
"There was a small amount of confusion when working with StorageGRID and Active Directory for access. We had to do things three to four times resulting in our engineer troubleshooting a couple of things. The location of the menu, along with what is inside the menu: configurations, settings, etc., is not straightforward to users. Most users are Windows-based. So, when make logical changes to the menu which are not similar to Windows, users and administrators get confused."
"The redundancy and reliability are great, but I also see room for improvement there. I would like to see more efficiency in the storage and dedupe/compression solutions."
"The processes around installation and upgrade need improvement."
"Improvements need to be made in the support area."
"We want to move towards Azure in the cloud. Right now, the system is all physical."
"Ceph is not a mature product at this time. Guides are misleading and incomplete. You will meet all kind of bugs and errors trying to install the system for the first time. It requires very experienced personnel to support and keep the system in working condition, and install all necessary packets."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."
"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 takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"I have encountered issues with stability when replication factor was not 3, which is the default and recommended value. Go below 3 and problems will arise."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"Scality RING8 could improve by having more features. We have to use two automation tools to meet our needs. We would prefer to use only one."
"When we used this solution in 2015, it was not scalable at all. I don't know if they have improved on that, but at the time, scalability was just horrible."
"Scality RING is not easy to learn for someone new. It is a little bit difficult. There are a lot of components to it, and you also need to understand them to work with it effectively."
