We performed a comparison between Maxta [EOL] and Red Hat Ceph Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about StarWind, Nutanix, Red Hat and others in Software Defined Storage (SDS)."The single-pane-of-glass VMware interface makes configuration and management easy so you do not need IT specialists."
"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."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers). We didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server/disk failures."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"High reliability with commodity hardware."
"A new company took over the product and now the support for Maxta has gone way downhill."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"In the deployment step, we need to create some config files to add Ceph functions in OpenStack modules (Nova, Cinder, Glance). It would be useful to have a tool that validates the format of the data in those files, before generating a deploy with failures."
"It took me a long time to get the storage drivers for the communication with Kubernetes up and running. The documentation could improve it is lacking information. I'm not sure if this is a Ceph problem or if Ceph should address this, but it was something I ran into. Additionally, there is a performance issue I am having that I am looking into, but overall I am satisfied with the performance."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
Earn 20 points
Maxta [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Software Defined Storage (SDS) while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews. Maxta [EOL] is rated 7.0, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Maxta [EOL] writes "Has the ability to have a single-pane-of-glass using the VMware interface but it needs better support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". Maxta [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and NetApp StorageGRID.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.
