We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Cohesity SpanFS vs. Nasuni

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cohesity SpanFS Logo
358 views|271 comparisons
Nasuni Logo
2,789 views|2,213 comparisons
Top Review
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"It has snapshot capabilities. We take advantage of those."

More Cohesity SpanFS Pros »

"The global file locking feature is valuable. The ability to quickly deploy new sites is also valuable.""The most valuable feature is the storage in that it only keeps the last-used data locally, while everything else is backed up to the cloud. That way, we never really have to worry about file space in each office or the replication to the other file servers for DR.""The most valuable feature is disaster recovery. We can fully recover a site in two hours.""The most valuable feature is the simplicity of the backup and restore functions.""The Nasuni management dashboard is helpful because, on the administration side, I'm able to view all of the different filers that we have in the UK, rather than check each one of them individually.""The most valuable feature is that we have redundancy in our data. It's nice to know that it is cached both locally on the filters, as well as stored on that cloud.""Nasuni has helped to eliminate on-premises infrastructure. We were using about eight to 10 different types of vendors or small storage boxes for provisioning and shared access for users. We got rid of all those. That has eliminated operational overhead and footprint at our data center. We don't have to worry about any hardware or monitoring particular devices, and hundreds of devices have been decommissioned. Now, for provisioning, everything is on Nasuni. I assume this has made a big difference in costs.""Another helpful feature, in addition to restoring a file that was deleted within 24 to 48 hours, is that we have the ability to restore a file or a folder that was deleted, going all the way back to the inception of that file or folder. That means we actually have unlimited backups to the inception point of data with Nasuni."

More Nasuni Pros »

Cons
"Its read performance can be improved. It is just slow in comparison to other file systems, but a lot of it also has to do with the fact that they have a limited number of spindles under each node."

More Cohesity SpanFS Cons »

"Room for improvement would be the speed of replication of new files. I would also like to see cloud mirroring.""The only thing that I'd like to see is more support for platforms like OneDrive or Box.com.""The performance of the filesystem could be improved.""One thing to consider is that Nasuni will have the same limitations that a traditional file storage solution will have, although that is because they are taking the place of a traditional architectural model. For example, Office 365 supports collaboration on documents such as Excel files and Word documents, but because Nasuni is a traditional file server, in that sense, it can't make use of that functionality.""When we first set up our bandwidth limiting, we had a few problems when it came to managing it. This is something that could be made easier; however, we were able to make the changes that we needed to for our environment.""Nasuni recently implemented a health system for filers. However, it needs better visibility because it lacks data and an explanation, or reasoning as to why a particular filer may be unhealthy.""The user-friendliness of its access needs improvement. When I log into the console, I see all the files that we handle globally. There are hundreds of Nasuni files that I can see on the console, but no way that I can filter them down. While this is a small thing, I need to scroll down and select the ones that I want. "Control F" doesn't work nor is there a dropdown menu that I can click on and select the ones that I want.""One area that we've recently spoken to Nasuni about is single sign-on. Another is integrating Nasuni with Azure Active Directory. In our particular case, that would allow for third-party consultants to access our Azure Active Directory environment as opposed to coming to our on-premises environment."

More Nasuni Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"I won't talk about specific numbers, but it is a little hard to compare it to other products out there because there is nobody out there that does exactly what they do. If you are just comparing it to another NAS box, it is probably going to look higher, but that's an unfair comparison because it does things that a NAS box can't do."

More Cohesity SpanFS Pricing and Cost Advice »

"It is around $850 per terabyte per year. Any additional costs that you would incur are for the local caching devices that you'll need to access Nasuni. You kind of provide your own virtual machines or compute to access the data. You also pay for the object storage. So, there are three parts to it. There is the Nasuni license per terabyte. You would also pay for the actual object storage in the cloud, and then you would pay for virtual machines to access the storage.""The pricing is on par with everybody else, and fair.""The cost is based on the capacity, which is approximately $100 USD per terabyte.""It has a license fee as well as hardware costs, which we would incur if we want to use Nasuni Cloud Storage Gateway for upgrades.""I would not say it is economically priced, but it is affordable. If you can afford to pay for it, it is worth the money, but it is definitely not overpriced. It is priced about where it needs to be in the market. We were satisfied with the way they did their licensing and how they handled it. I believe they actually license by data size. It is based on how much data is being held on the machine and replicated, and that's completely understandable. So, for us, their pricing was as expected and affordable.""Our agreement is set up such that we pay annually per terabyte, and we buy a chunk of it at a time. Then if we run out of space, we go back to them and buy another chunk."

More Nasuni Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File System Software solutions are best for your needs.
541,108 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: It has snapshot capabilities. We take advantage of those.
Top Answer: I won't talk about specific numbers, but it is a little hard to compare it to other products out there because there is nobody out there that does exactly what they do. If you are just comparing it to… more »
Top Answer: Its read performance can be improved. It is just slow in comparison to other file systems, but a lot of it also has to do with the fact that they have a limited number of spindles under each node.
Top Answer: The global file locking feature is valuable. The ability to quickly deploy new sites is also valuable.
Top Answer: It is around $850 per terabyte per year. Any additional costs that you would incur are for the local caching devices that you'll need to access Nasuni. You kind of provide your own virtual machines or… more »
Top Answer: Room for improvement would be the speed of replication of new files. I would also like to see cloud mirroring.
Ranking
6th
Views
358
Comparisons
271
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
378
Rating
N/A
1st
Views
2,789
Comparisons
2,213
Reviews
12
Average Words per Review
1,777
Rating
8.9
Comparisons
Also Known As
SpanFS
Learn More
Overview

Designed to combine the best of enterprise and cloud stacks, SpanFS exposes industry-standard, globally distributed NFS, SMB and S3 interfaces.

The IO Engine detects random vs. sequential IO profiles, splits the data into chunks, performs deduplication and directs to the most appropriate storage tier.

SpanFS also includes a new Metadata Store based on a consistent, distributed, NoSQL store for fast operations at scale.

SnapTree® provides a distributed meta data structure based on B+ tree concepts. It supports unlimited, frequent snapshots with no performance degradation.

Nasuni combines storage, backup and disaster recovery into a single solution. No additional backup software is necessary. With multiple copies of every snapshot stored in the cloud across multiple geographies, in locations of the company’s choosing, the enterprise is fully protected in case of a disaster. A full restore is as simple as starting up a virtual machine.

Offer
Learn more about Cohesity SpanFS
Learn more about Nasuni
Sample Customers
Tribune Media
Environmental Systems Design Inc., Imagination, Lewis Group of Companies, Saint Michaels College, TBG Partners, Sedgwick LLP, Barry Isett & Associates, Perkins+Will
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company35%
Comms Service Provider10%
Government9%
Wholesaler/Distributor6%
REVIEWERS
Construction Company47%
Marketing Services Firm20%
Engineering Company7%
Financial Services Firm7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company26%
Comms Service Provider13%
Media Company8%
Manufacturing Company7%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business13%
Midsize Enterprise44%
Large Enterprise44%

Cohesity SpanFS is ranked 6th in File System Software with 1 review while Nasuni is ranked 1st in File System Software with 13 reviews. Cohesity SpanFS is rated 0.0, while Nasuni is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cohesity SpanFS writes "An integrated solution with good snapshot capabilities, stability, and scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nasuni writes "Secure, reliable, good performance, helpful alerting, and responsive support". Cohesity SpanFS is most compared with Oracle ZFS, Amazon FSx, CTERA Edge X Series and WekaIO Matrix, whereas Nasuni is most compared with Panzura, AWS Storage Gateway, Qumulo, CTERA Cloud Backup and NetApp AltaVault.

See our list of best File System Software vendors.

We monitor all File System Software 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.