We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"We have been able to consolidate storage into Pavilion. Pavilions are our only SANs because it is a bring your own disk solution. When new drives come out, we are able to take out half of the drives in the system, put in new drives, move our VMs over to the new drives, take the other drives out, and populate those with new drives. Then, we are suddenly twice as dense as we were before. NVMe flash is only going to get denser and cheaper so we can make use of that every couple of years by just throwing newer disks into it at a fraction of the cost of a new SAN."
"The high performance is very valuable, as well as the enterprise reliability features."
"There's lots of flexibility in how we use the resources while also maintaining a small footprint."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It performed great originally, and when it performed great, it was awesome."
"This solution has reduced our data center costs because when we went from the 8000 and 3200 series that took us from 20 racks of storage down to two."
"The solution’s thin provisioning has allowed us to add new applications without having to purchase additional storage. We use thin provisioning for everything. We use the deduplication compression functionality for all of our NetApps. If we weren't using thin provisioning, we'd probably have two to times more storage on our floor right now than we do today."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the deduplication and the ability to move data to different clouds."
"The most valuable features of this solution are snapshotting and cloning."
"The overall latency in our environment is very low because it's All Flash and we've got 10 Giga dedicated to the storage network"
"Speed, reliability, ease of use are the most valuable features."
"Our AFF 8040 is currently helping us in terms of response time and speed because it is a flash system. Most importantly, it enables our SQL Cluster to respond to database queries and things a lot faster. It minimizes latency."
"Switching to AFF has improved the performance of a lot of our virtual machines in a VMware environment. The number of support tickets that we receive has fallen to almost zero because of this, so it's been a real help for our virtual server support team."
"The rail system that Pavilion uses to mount up into a standard Dell or APC cabinet extends further back than normal rails, and they cover up the zero PDU slot. So, I don't like the rail system that comes with the device. That is my biggest complaint."
"In our current configuration, we can only run the line controllers in high availability, active-standby mode, whereas we would like to see active-active implemented."
"I would like to see the management layer improved."
"I wouldn't say I like anything about this solution. We are looking for a replacement with Dell EMC and Pure Storage. Tegile's performance, support, and features are horrible. It's going down. Multiple companies have bought it. It looked okay at one point in time, like four years ago. Even though it wasn't one of the best, it still looked okay. Since the management has changed several times, it looks like it's going down the drain. Performance is horrible now. Our original intent was to buy new storage in about two years. But since it became a critical urgency for us, we decided to purchase a new one in two or three months. It would be better if they improved the codebase. We have issues very often with their code, and I think that is the main pain point. The hardware is also horrible because we have either a controller failure or a SATADOM failure very often. Now and then, we also have a disc failure. They have to get their act together. They have to make sure their hardware is robust, they have to make sure their code is good, and then we can think about new features and functionality. First, make the unit run properly, and then we can think about additions. Obviously, their support has to be knowledgeable. Because when I told them, "we have latency issues, come troubleshoot it for us," nobody came. But if we tell them that "we need to do a firmware upgrade," then they are like, "okay. Let's do a firmware upgrade." They will come to do the firmware upgrade, and then they will go. But with the firmware upgrades, you might never know when it works properly and when it doesn't work properly. If there is a disc that needs to be replaced, and we ask them to replace it, they'll say, "okay, just share the remote station with us, and we'll run some commands, and we'll validate which disc is faulty. If it's really faulty, we will send the disc. We do that, and then they find the faulty disc and send a replacement. They will do these minor things. But that's not what we are looking for. We are looking for more features and more functionality. Like if there is latency, try to help us out and help the customer find where the latency is. It doesn't necessarily have to be only with SAN storage. It might be a configuration issue, or it might be something else. So, you should help the customer find where the issue is. Unfortunately, that is not what we are getting from them. So they have to improve that a lot."
"Technical support is bad. It'd grade them at 30% or 40%. The response time is terrible."
"We would like to have NVMe on FabricPool working because it broke our backups. We enabled FabricPool to do the tiering from our AFFs to our Webscale but it sort of broke our Cobalt backups."
"Something I've talked to NetApp about in the past is going more to a node-based architecture, like the hyper-converged solutions that we are doing nowadays. Because the days of having to buy massive quantities of storage all at one time, have changed to being able to grow in smaller increments from a budgetary standpoint. This change would be great for our business. This is what my leadership would like to see in a lot of things that they purchase now. I would like to see that architecture continue to evolve in that clustered environment."
"It would be very useful if we could do the NFS to CIFS file transfer, but it is not supported at this time."
"The cost of this solution should be reduced."
"It has not reduced our data center costs. NetApp charges a pretty penny for their stuff."
"We have had issues with CIFS presentations and outages, so if that was removed, we could do seamless upgrades without affecting CIFS presentations. That would be an advantage. That's about the only improvement I can think of."
"We currently use some thin provisioning for our planning system, but we will probably move away from thin provisioning because our Solaris planning system actually has some issues with the thin provisioning and way Solaris handles it, since Solaris uses a ZFS file system. The ZFS file system doesn't like the thin provisioning changing things and it brings systems down, which is bad."
"Tech support is great with NetApp if you can get past Tier 1. A lot of times when you open a new case or do a direct dial-in with an issue, like with any support, you will definitely reach a Tier 1 level that is not particularly helpful until you get escalated to an expert."
"This is hardware. They have a singular array that you can populate with your own disk, or you can buy the disks through them. For controllers, you pay for the components inside of the SAN, but there is only one chassis that they work with."
"The licensing fees are very reasonable."
"I think we pay around 100 grand per year for three arrays or four arrays."
"The pricing is good."
"It consolidates a lot of our storage into one or two chassis, which makes money savings in our data center."
"We have used the solution’s thin provisioning to add new applications without having to purchase additional storage. We use thin provisioning on all of our flash arrays at this point. It gives us the choice to be able to overprovision and take advantage of compression, compaction, and thin provisioning all at the same time. We can get more out of the purchases that we make."
"I would like it to be a lot less expensive, but it's been a very good solution for us."
"The price of the upgrading of the solution is high. I could buy a whole unit of All Flash FAS 300 with a shelf for around $285,000. Yet if I want to add one additional shelf, it'll cost me $275,000. So they want you to upgrade by replacing it. It's cheaper to buy a whole new unit than to just scale out. The upside is they last. AFF lasts us three or four years. So that's a good investment."
"It definitely reduces costs because it simply takes less power to run these systems. While the SSDs don't take power, they are in general very big right now. So, the running cost has decreased for a lot of our customers."
"One of the reasons we like this solution is that all of the features are included with the one license."
"We would like it to be free."
Pavilion HyperParallel Data Platform
The Pavilion HyperParallel Data Platform™ dramatically accelerates what organizations achieve by delivering universally unmatched storage performance, in an incredibly compact solution while reducing data center costs and complexity. Unrivaled flexibility for multiple data types and protocols, along with broad ecosystem integration, ensure that every customer has choice and control.
What is the Pavilion HyperParallel Data Platform
The Pavilion HyperParallel Data Platform is comprised of the Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array™ and Pavilion HyperOS™. The Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array leverages a unique, switch-based architecture to create a multi-controller solution that delivers an unmatched combination of high performance, ultra-low latency, and storage density. Pavilion HyperOS is a powerful, purpose-built storage operating system designed to unlock the power of the multi-controller Pavilion HyperParallel Flash Array, which delivers scalability and flexibility that no other solution can offer.
Pavilion HyperParallel Data Platform Data Sheet
Download the Pavilion HyperParallel Data Platform data sheet. Updated: December 2020
Western Digital through its IntelliFlash arrays delivers high-performance storage with a complete range of features and connectivity options, including inline compression and deduplication, application and VM consistent snapshots, replication, RAID, data encryption, VMware vCenter integration, and multi-protocol support for SAN (FC, iSCSI) and NAS (NFS, SMBv3). IntelliFlash arrays deliver high availability through dualredundant and hot-swappable components, active/active or active/passive controllers, non-disruptive software upgrades, eMLC flash, and proactive cloud-based monitoring, analytics, and intelligence. A RESTful API provides scripted or programmatic control.
NetApp AFF8000 All Flash FAS systems combine all-flash performance with unified data management from flash to disk to cloud. Leverage the Data Fabric to move data securely across your choice of clouds—enabled by Cloud ONTAP™ and NetApp Private Storage for Cloud. Plus, you get the industry’s most efficient and comprehensive integrated data protection suite, on premises or in the cloud.
IntelliFlash is ranked 29th in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 2 reviews while NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is ranked 1st in All-Flash Storage Arrays with 40 reviews. IntelliFlash is rated 4.0, while NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IntelliFlash writes "A unified flash storage solution with poor performance, support, and features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) writes "Good price to performance ratio, no latency, and simple to use". IntelliFlash is most compared with Tintri VMstore, Dell EMC Unity XT, HPE Nimble Storage, Pure Storage FlashArray and HPE 3PAR StoreServ, whereas NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) is most compared with Pure Storage FlashArray, Dell EMC Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, HPE Nimble Storage and Dell EMC PowerStore. See our IntelliFlash vs. NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage Arrays 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.