Compare NetApp Private Storage vs. Panasas ActiveStor

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, IBM, Dell EMC and others in NAS. Updated: December 2020.
456,249 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:

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NAS solutions are best for your needs.
456,249 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The one thing I've noticed with NetApp when you buy hardware and you can use it for a while and then you have to get new hardware. I wish the hardware would last a little bit longer. Instead, in three… more »
Top Answer: It back ends some ESXi through NFS shares. I think our database people use it some as well and we have SnapMirror. We've done snapshots for a long time and I found pretty good value there. SnapMirror… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Ranking
5th
out of 26 in NAS
Views
561
Comparisons
362
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
1,617
Rating
9.0
17th
out of 26 in NAS
Views
337
Comparisons
278
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Popular Comparisons
Compared 34% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Also Known As
NPSActiveStor
Learn
NetApp
Panasas
Overview

NetApp Private Storage (NPS) for Cloud is a family of enterprise storage solutions that lets you use multiple industry-leading clouds and maintain complete control over your data on dedicated storage systems from NetApp.

In our most recent product, the ActiveStor Ultra, Panasas has developed a new approach called Dynamic Data Acceleration Technology. It uses a carefully balanced set of HDDs, SATA SSD, NVMe SSD, NVDIMM, and DRAM to provide a combination of excellent performance and low cost per terabyte.

• HDDs will provide high bandwidth data storage if they are never asked to store anything small and only asked to do large sequential transfers. Therefore, we only store large Component Objects on our low-cost HDDs.

• SATA SSDs provide cost-effective and highbandwidth storage as a result of not having any seek times, so that’s where we keep our small Component Objects.

• NVMe SSDs are built for very low latency accesses, so we store all our metadata in a database and keep that database on an NVMe SSD. Metadata accesses are very sensitive to latency, whether it is POSIX metadata for the files being stored or metadata for the internal operations of the OSD.

• An NVDIMM (a storage class memory device) is the lowest latency type of persistent storage device available, and we use one to store our transaction logs: user data and metadata being written by the application to the OSD, plus our internal metadata. That allows PanFS to provide very low latency commits back to the application.

• We use the DRAM in each OSD as an extremely low latency cache of the most recently read or written data and metadata.

To gain the most benefit from the SATA SSD’s performance, we try to keep the SATA SSD about 80% full. If it falls below that, we will (transparently and in the background) pick the smallest Component Objects in the HDD pool and move them to the SSD until it is about 80% full. If the SSD is too full, we will move the largest Component Objects on the SSD to the HDD pool. Every ActiveStor Ultra Storage Node performs this optimization independently and continuously. It’s easy for an ActiveStor Ultra to pick which Component Objects to move, it just needs to look in its local NVMe-based database.

Offer
Learn more about NetApp Private Storage
Learn more about Panasas ActiveStor
Sample Customers
ASE IT, Concerto Cloud Advanced Mask Technology Center Airbus Argonne National Laboratory The University of Texas at Dallas School of Arts Technology and Emerging Communication Башнефть Boeing Bosch California Academy of Sciences Caltech Canon Case Western Reserve University Conoco Phillips Deluxe DirecTV Fairfield Technologies United States Federal Reserve Garvan Institute of Medical Research Goodyear Halliburton Harvard Medical School Honeywell In-Depth Geophysical Intel Kawasaki Lockheed Martin 3M Magseis Fairfield Mammal Studios The Man Group McLaren Mercedes-Benz MINES ParisTech NASA US Navy National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center NBCUniversal National Institutes of Health Nio National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Northrup Grumman Novartis Partners Healthcare Procter & Gamble PGS Pratt & Whitney Rutherford Appleton Lab Siemens Sim International Sinopec Solers Square Cnix TGS Toyota Motorsport GMBH Toppan Turner UMass Medical School United Technologies University of Georgia University of California Los Angeles University of Minnesota University of Notre Dame University of California San Diego Center for Microbiome Innovation Whiskytree
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, IBM, Dell EMC and others in NAS. Updated: December 2020.
456,249 professionals have used our research since 2012.

NetApp Private Storage is ranked 5th in NAS with 2 reviews while Panasas ActiveStor is ranked 17th in NAS. NetApp Private Storage is rated 9.0, while Panasas ActiveStor is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of NetApp Private Storage writes "Has many new added features and it can control ingress and egress ". On the other hand, NetApp Private Storage is most compared with Qumulo, Buurst SoftNAS, FreeNAS, Hitachi NAS and Dell EMC PowerScale (Isilon), whereas Panasas ActiveStor is most compared with Dell EMC PowerScale (Isilon), Sonexion Scale-out Lustre Storage System, IBM FlashSystem and NetApp FAS Series.

See our list of best NAS vendors.

We monitor all NAS 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.