We performed a comparison between Dell ECS and OpenShift 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."The scalability is good."
"The performance is good."
"Competitive object storage platform that's stable and scalable."
"We face very few hardware failures."
"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."
"Dell's technical support team is good."
"I have found Dell ECS to be scalable."
"This solution is very easy to use, and is very reliable."
"Scaling and uptime of the applications are positives."
"The most valuable feature is the auto scalers for all microservices. The feature allows us to place request limits and it is much cheaper than AWS."
"The scalability of OpenShift combined with Kubernetes is good. At least from the software standpoint, it becomes quite easy to handle the scalability through configuration. You need to constantly monitor the underlying infrastructure and ensure that it has adequate provisioning. If you have enough infrastructure, then managing the scalability is quite easy which is done through configuration."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the security context constraint (SCC). The solution’s security throughout the stack is good. And security context constraints provide port-level security. It's a granular level of control, where you can give privileges to certain users to work on certain applications."
"This solution is providing a platform with OOTB features that are difficult to build from scratch."
"The solution provides a lot of flexibility to the application team for running their applications in the container platform, without needing to monitor the entire infrastructure all the time. It automatically scales and automatically self-heals. There is also a mechanism to alert the team in case it is over-committing or overutilizing the application."
"The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that."
"We have found the cluster management function to be very good with this product."
"Dell ECS could improve the price of the solution. It is expensive."
"There is room for improvement in the DPI reports, as they could be made more user-friendly."
"It is a good solution, except for the cost."
"Its security can be improved."
"Dell EMC ECS should support segregation of duty, particularly for role-based access controls. Having a single pane of glass for smarter observation and better control mechanism would also make this solution better."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"The initial setup is not so easy."
"They need to ensure that the system will work if a site goes down."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"Documentation and technical support could be improved. The product is good, but when we raise a case with support—say we are having an image issue—the support is not really up to the mark. It is difficult to get support... When we raise a case, their support people will hesitate to get on a call or a screen-sharing session. That is a major drawback when it comes to OpenShift."
"One glaring flaw is how OpenShift handles operators. Sometimes operators are forced to go into a particular namespace. When you do that, OpenShift creates an installation plan for everything in that namespace. These operators may be completely separate from each other and have nothing to do with each other, but now they are tied at the hip. You can't upgrade one without upgrading all of them. That's a huge mistake and highly problematic."
"The metrics in OpenShift can use improvement."
"The tool lacks some features to make it compliant with Kubernetes"
"Credential not hidden, so people on the same group can view it."
"The whole area around the hybrid cloud could be improved. I would like to deploy a Red Hat OpenShift cluster on-premise and on the cloud, then have Red Hat do the entire hybrid cloud management."
"It would be great if it supported Bitbucket repositories too."
Dell ECS is ranked 5th in File and Object Storage with 24 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. Dell ECS is rated 8.0, while OpenShift is rated 8.4. 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 OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". Dell ECS is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), Amazon AWS, NetApp StorageGRID, MinIO and Red Hat Ceph Storage, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud.
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.