We compared Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
User reviews indicate that Red Hat Ceph Storage is praised for its scalability, flexibility, and efficiency, with good customer service, while MinIO is valued for its scalability, high performance and user-friendly interface. Red Hat Ceph Storage is commended for reliability, compatibility, and cost-effectiveness, while MinIO is preferred for its simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and ease of use. Both products have positive ROI but may benefit from enhancements in different areas such as scalability, performance, and user interface.
Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage is praised for its scalability, flexibility, and ability to handle large data amounts, while MinIO is valued for its scalability, high performance, and user-friendly interface. Both products integrate seamlessly with existing systems.
Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage has been praised for its minimal and efficient setup costs, while MinIO is known for its easy and straightforward implementation. Users find Red Hat Ceph Storage reasonably priced and cost-effective, while MinIO offers flexible pricing options. Both products have fair and reasonable licensing structures., Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO both received positive returns on investment according to user feedback. Users expressed satisfaction with the cost-effectiveness and improved performance of Red Hat Ceph Storage. On the other hand, MinIO users highlighted the value and benefits they derived from using the product.
Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could improve in scalability, installation processes, documentation, GUI for management, performance, and troubleshooting capabilities. On the other hand, MinIO users suggest enhancements in performance, reliability, documentation, user interface, integration options, and feature set.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews for Red Hat Ceph Storage indicate varying time durations for deployment, setup, and implementation phases. In contrast, MinIO user reviews mention consistent timeframes for deployment and setup, with one user taking three months and another taking one week., Red Hat Ceph Storage is known for its knowledgeable and efficient customer service team, while MinIO has been praised for its exceptional assistance and dedication in providing prompt solutions. Both products prioritize customer satisfaction and smooth operations.
The summary above is based on 16 interviews we conducted recently with Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Nice web interface, easy to use, with a low memory footprint."
"This is an all-in-one, user-friendly data storage."
"The most valuable feature of MinIO is its ease of use, replication, and active directory. All the capabilities are in this solution."
"The container installation features are good. The S3 feature provisions the storage buckets making it easy. It allows me to spin up the public buckets with open-source technology."
"The initial setup was straightforward as MinIO provided good support documentation and took a couple of days to complete."
"The ability to spawn a MinIO Tenant on demand and shut it down right after is most valuable."
"The initial setup was very easy - one click, and it was installed."
"The features that I have found most valuable with MinIO is its coding bit rot protection and how it distributes the workload over all the servers."
"Red Hat Ceph Storage is a reliable solution, it works well."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"Ceph has simplified my storage integration. I no longer need two or three storage systems, as Ceph can support all my storage needs. I no longer need OpenStack Swift for REST object storage access, I no longer need NFS or GlusterFS for filesystem sharing, and most importantly, I no longer need LVM or DRBD for my virtual machines in OpenStack."
"The MinIO dashboard is minimal as there are only a couple of features inside the dashboard for a basic user. I would like this to be more robust with more click-around features."
"The monitoring capability is really bad and needs to be improved."
"The scalability is one of the limitations we have found. We are looking for another solution but they must provide the same characteristics, such as an affordable price and continuity."
"The Distributed User Interface (DUI) needs some work. It's hard to view a large set of data on the DUI. It's an issue with the DUI's performance."
"The documentation of the solution should improve."
"The developer support could be better."
"We had minor bugs occasionally."
"MinIO has behaved strangely in the past. For instance, the application dropped connection to MinIO. It's not too significant, but it loses connection. We're trying to understand exactly what is happening when this happens."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"Ceph is not a mature product at this time. Guides are misleading and incomplete. You will meet all kind of bugs and errors trying to install the system for the first time. It requires very experienced personnel to support and keep the system in working condition, and install all necessary packets."
"Routing around slow hardware."
MinIO is ranked 1st in File and Object Storage with 6 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 8 reviews. MinIO is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of MinIO writes "Has many out-of-the-box features like versioning support and management of roles and permissions ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Flexible and good for storage but can be complex to set up". MinIO is most compared with Pure Storage FlashBlade, NetApp StorageGRID, Dell ECS, Cloudian HyperStore and SwiftStack, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade, Dell ECS and NetApp StorageGRID. See our MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage 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.