We performed a comparison between Portworx Enterprise and Red Hat Ceph Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is user-friendly."
"I like that you have a small dedicated file system that is fast and resilient for containerized workloads."
"Portworx virtualizes the aspects of the underlying block storage. That is good because they can also use block storage for their future deployment instead of just NFS."
"Portworx is a simple solution. It's similar to Pure Storage products. They're all easy to use and install. You need to have a little expertise with containers to use Portworx, but it will be no problem for you if you understand containers."
"The best thing about Portworx is the Stork, they have called the VPS (Volume Replacement Strategy) and they also have topology awareness, and these are the three features I like."
"A custom IBM script is designed to tackle the storage management challenges within containerized environments, providing crucial data services and features required for enterprise applications."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"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."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug."
"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"I think the vendor could provide more training for new users who may not be familiar with containers."
"The documentation could be better."
"The integration has room for improvement."
"I would like to see a more native mapping to mainframe-type systems."
"It would be highly advantageous to include an integrated backup solution within the same license, rather than purchasing backup separately."
"They have not integrated Portworx with Ondat since they are too focused now on Pure Storage APIs and not on users like us."
"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
"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."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"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."
"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."
Portworx Enterprise is ranked 2nd in Cloud Software Defined Storage with 4 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 8 reviews. Portworx Enterprise is rated 9.0, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Portworx Enterprise writes "Works well under intensive load and scalable solution". 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". Portworx Enterprise is most compared with Red Hat Openshift Data Foundation, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, IBM Spectrum Scale, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) and Robin Cloud Native Storage for Kubernetes, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Pure Storage FlashBlade, Dell ECS and NetApp StorageGRID. See our Portworx Enterprise vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors and best Cloud Software Defined Storage 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.