We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem and Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, IBM, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network)."Data deduplication is one of the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is replication...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"Over the years, it has become increasingly user-friendly."
"The FlashSystem 900 consistently delivers performance below 1ms for read/write. This performance is essential for an effective SVC stretch-cluster configuration across two datacenters, and presenting active-active storage to the customer."
"It is simple to make an update."
"Speed (IOPS/second) – It is most vital for applications that need low latency and high speed for transferring the data."
"FlashSystem offers proven technology in a compact package."
"The initial setup is straightforward and can be done in an hour and a half by one person."
"I like its storage capacity, quick access to the data, speed, and overall storage management."
"If you want to expand, you cannot expand the disc enclosure. You have to buy a total individual node. Sometimes, this is difficult because we are just looking for capacity and not a node."
"Additional licenses might be added for the fundamental licenses, such as those for copying and flash copies."
"The data reduction pool feature sucks and is not recommended for use with heavy workloads."
"The GUI for monitoring performance metrics could provide better visibility. For example, it doesn't let me segregate the IOPS per volume."
"The customer's expectations are what they get on the cloud, they're expecting even in the on-premises deployments, going forward."
"The Data Reduction Pools (DRP) support could be better."
"The design is a little old-fashioned and could be updated. The rack is very primitive and designed in an older style."
"The solution has a low number of NVME host attachments at 16 per IO group over the fiber channel."
"The main thing Oracle can improve is the cost. It would be better if Oracle opened up the system to enable integration with other vendors. Whether it's the database, application server, or storage appliance, they should make it easy to integrate them. They need to open up more to ensure that it can work in any environment and IT ecosystem."
More Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM FlashSystem is ranked 2nd in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) with 106 reviews while Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance is ranked 8th in Modular SAN (Storage Area Network). IBM FlashSystem is rated 8.2, while Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem writes "An easy GUI and simple provisioning but our model does not support compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance writes "A stable unified storage system that enables quick access to data". IBM FlashSystem is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell Unity XT, NetApp AFF and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, whereas Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance is most compared with NetApp FAS Series, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), HPE 3PAR StoreServ and Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform.
See our list of best Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) vendors.
We monitor all Modular SAN (Storage Area Network) 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.
