We performed a comparison between MinIO and Pure Storage FlashBlade based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Nice web interface, easy to use, with a low memory footprint."
"Good interface and a good approach to development and testing environments."
"The stability of MinIO is good."
"The most valuable feature of MinIO is its ease of use, replication, and active directory. All the capabilities are in this solution."
"MinIO can work with attributes and folders, and it has the ability to use a stream approach for files. I have moments that should work exclusively. It also has some management features you can use, like exclusive locks that you can perform on one record or a collection."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of management and administration."
"The most valuable features are that MinIO is open, it works on-premise, and is compatible with the Amazon industry which is great for finding compatible libraries in many languages which is very good for developers."
"This is an all-in-one, user-friendly data storage."
"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."
"The initial setup was straightforward. If you know how to plug in power and network you're pretty much qualified. They were on site to configure the network, the box to fit into our network architecture. Other than that, we self-managed from there."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."
"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."
"We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to."
"I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good."
"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."
"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."
"The solution should have high availability. Also, support should be quick."
"The product's initial setup phase is complex."
"The solution lacks documentation."
"With problems, visibility is hard because everything is in containers. Difficult to get to the logs in order to figure out what the problem was."
"The monitoring capability is really bad and needs to be improved."
"The product's security is open by default, without any SSL."
"There should be the ability to expand the size after it has already been deployed. Currently, you cannot do that. It doesn't support an increase in size. Each time we spawn a new MinIO, we need to track the particular MinIO instance or tenant that has the file. Therefore, we had to create a multi-tenant solution that tracks the MinIO that has our artifacts. It isn't in one single instance. It should have better multi-tenancy support."
"The tool’s pricing needs to improve. We also encountered challenges while deploying the tool in Kubernetes. The documentation also was not too great. We have currently deployed the solution in a stand-alone fashion."
"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."
"The technical support needs to improve. When we open a case, it is auto assigned to a support tech person. Nine out of ten times, we get an email right back saying that person is off until tomorrow. I cannot handle that. They just did this over the weekend to us, too. I had to call our rep and have them do something about it."
"The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to us."
"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."
"We haven't been able to use much of the cloud area of Pure Storage. We have a storage server and it would be better if it could integrate with other cloud features of this solution."
"An area for improvement in Pure Storage FlashBlade is its price. It could be reduced. The technical support for Pure Storage FlashBlade also needs improvement. It used to be good, with more experienced engineers. Nowadays, it isn't, and it takes longer for support to solve problems."
"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."
"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."
MinIO is ranked 1st in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews while Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 6th in File and Object Storage with 31 reviews. MinIO is rated 8.0, while Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of MinIO writes " A tool for storage purposes that helps businesses save time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "A high-performing and scalable solution that improves data performance for S3 workloads". MinIO is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, NetApp StorageGRID, Dell ECS, Cloudian HyperStore and SwiftStack, whereas Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, Pure Storage FlashArray, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Dell ECS. See our MinIO vs. Pure Storage FlashBlade report.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object 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.
