Pure Storage FlashBlade vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Pure Storage FlashBlade 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on.""The snapshots, replication, and the ability to have immutable blades are the most valuable features. You're putting data snapshots out in those blades, and they cannot be touched. Its performance is great.""The initial setup is pretty easy and simple.""It performs well and it is also very fast.""It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy.""It is very easy to use, and it is very fast.""I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good.""The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Pros →

"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good.""I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product.""radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity.""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.""Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well.""The solution is pretty stable.""Ceph has simplified my storage integration. I no longer need two or three storage systems, as Ceph can support all my storage needs. I no longer need OpenStack Swift for REST object storage access, I no longer need NFS or GlusterFS for filesystem sharing, and most importantly, I no longer need LVM or DRBD for my virtual machines in OpenStack.""The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Pros →

Cons
"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes.""I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads.""I have not seen ROI.""I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution.""In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does.""There could be improvements in public cloud integration.""Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration.""In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Cons →

"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 needs a better UI for easier installation and management.""Routing around slow hardware.""This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing.""If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable.""It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed.""It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure.""The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "We used a reseller for the purchase."
  • "Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."
  • "I have seen ROI. It has allowed me to increase the density of my VMs without having to purchase anything additional."
  • "Our licensing is renewed annually."
  • "Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc."
  • "The price is a little high."
  • "In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."
  • "The price of this solution could be made more affordable."
  • More Pure Storage FlashBlade Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."
  • "There is no cost for software."
  • "Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription​​ as a bundle.​"
  • "We never used the paid support."
  • "If you can afford a product like Red Hat Ceph Storage then go for it. If you cannot, then you need to test Ceph and get your hands dirty."
  • "The price of this product isn't high."
  • "The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."
  • "The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."
  • More Red Hat Ceph Storage Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective.
    Top Answer:Pure Storage FlashBlade should improve on more cloud integration.
    Top Answer:Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, easy… more »
    Top Answer:We have not encountered any stability issues for the product.
    Top Answer:Red Hat Ceph Storage is difficult to maintain. We use CLI tools for maintenance, and the concept seems challenging. Additionally, it is difficult to expand the product due to balancing errors. It… more »
    Ranking
    6th
    Views
    4,380
    Comparisons
    2,994
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    513
    Rating
    8.6
    3rd
    Views
    14,228
    Comparisons
    11,834
    Reviews
    7
    Average Words per Review
    291
    Rating
    7.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Ceph
    Learn More
    Overview

    FlashBlade is the industry’s most advanced scale-out storage for unstructured data, powered by a modern, massively parallel architecture to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) and accelerate tomorrow’s discoveries and insights.

    Red Hat Ceph Storage is an enterprise open source platform that provides unified software-defined storage on standard, economical servers and disks. With block, object, and file storage combined into one platform, Red Hat Ceph Storage efficiently and automatically manages all your data.
    Sample Customers
    ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL
    Dell, DreamHost
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Manufacturing Company18%
    University12%
    Energy/Utilities Company12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization36%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business26%
    Midsize Enterprise24%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise41%
    Large Enterprise45%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business38%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise46%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise61%
    Buyer's Guide
    Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 6th in File and Object Storage with 30 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 21 reviews. Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, MinIO, Pure Storage FlashArray and Dell ECS, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Dell ECS and NetApp StorageGRID. See our Pure Storage FlashBlade 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.