We performed a comparison between Dell ECS and Red Hat Ceph Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like that the solution is easy to scale and that's its stable."
"This solution is very easy to use, and is very reliable."
"It's definitely good for unstructured data. In earlier days, we had Centera, so for the DR it's really good. It has load balancing facility, and we're using it with the Kemp Load Balancer."
"This product is very competitive."
"It is 100% stable. It is also scalable."
"The technology is very good, it performs well."
"I have found Dell ECS to be scalable."
"The stability is the most valuable aspect of the solution."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"We use the solution for cloud storage."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"Replicated and erasure coded pools have allowed for multiple copies to be kept, easy scale-out of additional nodes, and easy replacement of failed hard drives. The solution continues working even when there are errors."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"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 setup is very complex."
"If Dell ECS would be available as standalone software, so you can use any hardware with it, would make the solution better. It would also be good if Dell ECS had more integrations with other products."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"Dell EMC ECS could improve by having Relational Database Services(RDS) to review progress. Additionally, if the training was provided it would be a benefit, it would be good for our engineers."
"You should be able to calculate so that when it's full it's 100% full, not just 90%."
"They need to ensure that the system will work if a site goes down."
"It is a good solution, except for the cost."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"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."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"In the deployment step, we need to create some config files to add Ceph functions in OpenStack modules (Nova, Cinder, Glance). It would be useful to have a tool that validates the format of the data in those files, before generating a deploy with failures."
Dell ECS is ranked 5th in File and Object Storage with 25 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews. Dell ECS is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Dell ECS writes "Enables multiple protocol support, but its IOPS functionality needs improvement in terms of performance ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". Dell ECS is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), Amazon AWS, NetApp StorageGRID, MinIO and Scality RING, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Dell PowerScale (Isilon). See our Dell ECS vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object Storage 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.