We performed a comparison between Kaminario K2 [EOL] and Oracle FS1 Flash Storage System based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell Technologies, NetApp, Pure Storage and others in All-Flash Storage."The most valuable feature is that maintenance is free."
"Data reduction and compression. Sub millisecond latency."
"The speed of the Pure FlashArray is very, very fast and nothing in the market can compare to it."
"It simplifies the overall management. We don't have to worry about storage anymore."
"The amount of throughput that we're getting is really nice."
"The deduplication in the array combined with its snap technologies allows the product to be remotely/manually controlled or scheduled."
"We've had different types of storage, and three things of this solution are valuable. The first one is its outstanding performance. The second one is its stability. In the about three years that we've had it, we've had component failures, but we never had a service interruption or any data loss. The third one, which is really critical, is that it is super easy to use in terms of provisioning, storage, and managing the arrays. I'm able to maintain a multi-site environment with a couple of dozen arrays with a single mid-level storage admin."
"We also like the compactness, the small footprint. It takes up very little space in a data center and uses little power."
"Implementation of the solution is very simple."
"Inline compression"
"Ease of use: My installers - my administrators over the system - they love how easy and fast it is to install and spin up a LUN and get going."
"It provides a full feature set without separate licensing (deduplication, compression, snapshot, asynchronous replication, stable performance, etc.)."
"The capacity that we're saving by using Kaminario's K2 is giving us a four-to-one ratio for our deduplication."
"Built-in snapshot support gives us SAN-side functionality most other platforms would have had us license separately."
"The GUI is very straightforward and easy to use."
"Data reduction and snapshot abilities: Smaller footprint in the datacenter (lower cost for power, cooling, etc.)."
"It's actually shaking hands with the workflow solutions much better than any other storage."
"We have not seen a reduction in our TCO nor have we seen ROI."
"The setup needs to be improved the most. They can do a little more with the user interface, but the setup is what I would like to see made a bit easier."
"In the next release I would like to see integration into other third-party player providers like Google."
"We did have one hiccup with the integration of vCenter. When we were installing Pure Storage, we were using vCenter 6.7, which defaults to the HTML5 Web Client. The current plugin for Pure Storage doesn't show up in that client at all. You have to go and use the legacy FlexFlash client to see the Pure Storage plugin in vCenter."
"The one major gripe I have is that there is no snapshotting enabled by default on the SAN."
"I would like to get a weekly report of how our storage has been used, and if there is any storage sitting there not being used."
"Historical analytics would be useful. At the moment, they don't have any type of application built for historical analytics."
"The price could be better."
"A single pane of glass to monitor/manage multiple arrays would be helpful."
"I would like them to improve the look of the product’s external casing and shelves."
"The interface look and feel could be improved."
"Improved scale and budget planning with flexibility of the solution for budget needs and efficiency for growth with the great optimization ratio due to the nature of our use."
"The front panel of the drive shelf doesn't always seat firmly."
"I would like to see them work with Cisco, so it comes off the FIs, instead of having to go through my 10-gig network."
"Access to technical support should be improved for our region. Technical support is good, but they're very hard to access."
"The system currently has a 15TB LUN size limit and that snapshots need to be scheduled through script API instead of the GUI."
"It has to be flexible according to the customer's requirements. It has to be aligned with the customer business and the business environment."
Earn 20 points
Earn 20 points
Kaminario K2 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in All-Flash Storage while Oracle FS1 Flash Storage System is ranked 34th in All-Flash Storage. Kaminario K2 [EOL] is rated 8.8, while Oracle FS1 Flash Storage System is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaminario K2 [EOL] writes "Built-in snapshot support gives us SAN-side functionality most other platforms license separately". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle FS1 Flash Storage System writes "Has a fantastic feature-set and works well with workflow solutions". Kaminario K2 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Oracle FS1 Flash Storage System is most compared with Dell Unity XT.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash 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.
