Compare NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 1st in Cloud Software Defined Storage with 29 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 2nd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 8 reviews. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is rated 8.6, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Enables us to manage multiple petabytes of storage with a small team, including single node and HA instances". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Simplifies my storage integration by replacing multiple storage systems". NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, VMware vSAN and IBM Spectrum Scale, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with VMware vSAN, ScaleIO and LizardFS.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Spectrum Scale vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
We are definitely in the process of reducing our footprint on our secondary data center and all those snapshots technically reduce tape backup. That's from the protection perspective, but as far as files, it's much easier to use and manage and it's faster, too.The most valuable feature of this solution is that it makes our data readily available and we don't have to go through a lot of trouble to access it.The fast recovery time objective with the ability to bring the environment back to production in case something happens.Multiprotocol is the most valuable because Amazon was not able to provide us with access to the same data from Linux and from Windows clients. That was our value proposition for CVO, Cloud Volumes ONTAP.ONTAP's snapshot copies and thin clones in terms of operational recovery are pretty useful in recovering your data from a time in a snapshot. That's pretty useful for when you have an event where a disaster struck and then you need to recover all your data. It's pretty helpful and pretty fast in those terms.Replication to the cloud is the most valuable feature. Deduplication and compression are also very important to us. We are in the process of adopting to the cloud. We are going to AWS and we are trying to do a safety technician call out with integration to the cloud. NetApp allows us to move some of the volume to the cloud, at the same time that we continue providing the cloud services that we have on premises.For us, the value comes from the solution's flexibility, speed, and hopefully cost savings in the long term.The initial setup was straightforward. We started with a small pilot and we then moved to production with no downtime at all.

Read more »

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 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.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.We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage.Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment.The community support is very good.It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits.We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment.

Read more »

Cons
I think the challenge now is more in terms of keeping an air gap. The notion that it is in the cloud, easy to break, etc. The challenge now is mostly about the air gap and how we can protect that in the cloud.We would like to have support for high availability in multi-regions.The integration wizard requires a bit of streamlining. There are small things that misconfigure or repeat the deployment that will create errors, specifically in Azure.Not a perfect ten because it's not very efficient with upgrades and management.In terms of improvement, I would like to see the Azure NetApp Files have the capability of doing SnapMirrors. Azure NetApp Files is, as we know, is an AFF system and it's not used in any of the Microsoft resources. It's basically NetApp hardware, so the best performance you can achieve, but the only reason we can't use that right now is because of the region that it's available in. The second was the SnapMirror capability that we didn't have that we heavily rely on right now.I would like to see something from NetApp about backups. I know that NetApp offers some backup for Office 365, but I would like to see something from NetApp for more backup solutions.I would like this solution to be brought to all the three major players. Right now it's supported only on AWS and Azure. They should bring it to Google as well, because we would like to have flexibility in choosing the underlying cloud storage provider.In the next release, I would like to see more options on the dashboard.

Read more »

It needs a better UI for easier installation and management.I have encountered issues with stability when replication factor was not 3, which is the default and recommended value. Go below 3 and problems will arise.Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow.This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing.Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet.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.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.Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
For NetApp it's about $20,000 for a single node and $30,000 for the HA.Our licensing costs are folded into the hardware purchases and I have never differentiated between the two.Cost is a big factor, because a lot of companies can't afford enterprise grade equipment all the time. They skimp where they can. I would recommend that they improve the cost.Cloud is cloud. It's still expensive. Any good solution comes with a price tag. That's where we are looking to see how well we can manage our data in the cloud by trying to optimize the costs.I know the licensing is a bit on the high-end. That's when we had to downsize our MetroCluster disks and just migrate to disks that were half used. We migrated into those just to reduce maintenance costs.In addition to the standard licensing fees, there are fees for Azure, the VMs themselves and for data transfer.The standard pricing is online. Pricing depends. If you're using the PayGo model, then it's just the normal costs on the Microsoft page. If you're using Bring Your Own License, which is what we're doing, then you get with your sales contact at NetApp and start figuring out what price is the best, in the end, for your company.They allow a special price if you are working closely with them. Since we have a lot of NetApp systems, we got some kind of discount. That's something they do for other customers, not just for us. The price was fair. In addition to the licensing fees, you're paying Amazon for your usage...

Read more »

If you can afford a product like Red Hat Ceph Storage then go for it. If you cannot, then you need to test Ceph and get your hands dirty.We never used the paid support.Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription​​ as a bundle.​

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Software Defined Storage solutions are best for your needs.
382,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
3,938
Comparisons
2,379
Reviews
30
Average Words per Review
871
Avg. Rating
8.6
Views
25,237
Comparisons
18,663
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
258
Avg. Rating
8.9
Top Comparisons
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Also Known As
ONTAP CloudCeph
Learn
NetApp
Red Hat
Overview

The leading enterprise-grade storage management solution, delivers secure, proven storage management services and supports up to a capacity of 368TB. Software service supports various use cases, such as: File shares and block-level storage serving NAS (NFS, SMB / CIFS) and SAN (iSCSI) Disaster Recovery, Backup, and Archive DevOps Databases (SQL, Oracle, NoSQL) Cloud Volumes ONTAP is offered in a standard single-node configuration or in a High Availability (HA) configuration.

Red Hat Ceph Storage is an enterprise open source platform that provides unified software-defined storage on standard, economical servers and disks. With block, object, and file storage combined into one platform, Red Hat Ceph Storage efficiently and automatically manages all your data.
Offer
Learn more about NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP
Learn more about Red Hat Ceph Storage
Sample Customers
Rohit, AdvacnedMD, D2L, Trinity Mirror, Eidos Media, WireStorm, Cordant Group, JFK Medical Center, ALD Automotive, Healthix, City of Baton Rouge, ON Semiconductor Dell, DreamHost
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company29%
Energy/Utilities Company10%
Manufacturing Company10%
Comms Service Provider10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company40%
Manufacturing Company22%
Comms Service Provider7%
Financial Services Firm5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company33%
Comms Service Provider19%
Manufacturing Company9%
Media Company6%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Spectrum Scale vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Cloud Software Defined 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.
Sign Up with Email