We performed a comparison between Commvault Distributed Storage [EOL] and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Some customers have chosen this solution for its features, benefits, and user-friendly interface."
"Commvault is a user-friendly tool, so most people are happy to adopt this solution."
"We use the mirroring to mirror our volumes to our DR location. We also create snapshots for backups. Snapshots will create a specified snapshot to be able to do a DR test without disrupting our standard mirrors. That means we can create a point-in-time snapshot, then use the ability of FlexClones to make a writeable volume to test with, and then blow it away after the DR test."
"SnapMirror helps mirror metadata and data volumes between endpoints in a data fabric."
"We're able to use the SnapMirror function and SnapMirror data from our on-prem environment into Azure. That is super-helpful. SnapMirror allows you to take data that exists on one NetApp, on a physical NetApp storage platform, and copy it over to another NetApp storage platform. It's a solid, proven technology, so we don't worry about whether data is getting lost or corrupted during the SnapMirror."
"The ability for our users to restore data from the Snapshots is very valuable."
"The most valuable feature is its exceptional performance and storage efficiency."
"The ability to see things going back and forth has been quite useful."
"CVO gives us the ability to access data as quickly as possible, which is critical because of the mission set we handle. Some things cannot wait. For example, we tried having the data in the cloud itself, but it took too long for us to retrieve it from cold or deep storage. If we have it ONTAP or on-prem, it's so much easier to pull it within minutes."
"The most valuable features of this solution are SnapShot, FlexClone, and deduplication."
"NAS backups and BNP protocol backups could be improved. We require some more advanced features. I would also like some features that would enable us to deploy faster, like an orchestrator or something."
"The solution does not support some cloud SaaS applications and has room for improvement with better integration to the storage array."
"There is room for improvement with the capacity. There's a very hard limit to how many disks you can have and how much space you can have. That is something they should work to fix, because it's limiting. Right now, the limit is about 360 terabytes or 36 disks."
"Scale-up and scale-out could be improved. It would be interesting to have multiple HA pairs on one cluster, for example, or to increase the single instances more, from a performance perspective. It would be good to get more performance out of a single HA pair."
"Their support and development teams can collaborate better to resolve an issue."
"We want to be able to add more than six disks in aggregate, but there is a limit of the number of disks in aggregate. In GCP, they provide less by limiting the sixth disk in aggregate. In Azure, the same solution provides 12 disks in an aggregate versus GCP where it is just half that amount. They should bump up the disk in aggregate requirement so we don't have to migrate the aggregate from one to another when the capacities are full."
"Something we would like to see is the ability to better manage the setup and tie it to our configuration management database. We manage our whole IT infrastructure out of that database."
"The encryption and deduplication features still have a lot of room for improvement."
"The dashboard is a little bit clunky. I like to see it a little bit more on the simplistic side. I would like to be able to create my own widgets and customize what I want to see a little bit more versus what is currently there. That would be helpful so that when I log in, I go straight to my widget or my board without going to multiple places to get to what I need to find or build."
"I would want more visibility and data analytics where we can see anomalies within the shares within the GUI."
More Commvault Distributed Storage [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Commvault Distributed Storage [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 2 reviews while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 1st in Cloud Software Defined Storage with 60 reviews. Commvault Distributed Storage [EOL] is rated 9.0, while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Commvault Distributed Storage [EOL] writes "Fast storage, performance, and backup for users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Its data tiering helps keep storage costs under control". Commvault Distributed Storage [EOL] is most compared with Portworx Enterprise, whereas NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Amazon S3, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Google Cloud Storage and Portworx Enterprise. See our Commvault Distributed Storage [EOL] vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors and best Cloud Software Defined Storage vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.
