Compare Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Pure Storage FlashBlade is ranked 2nd in File and Object Storage with 14 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 1st in File and Object Storage with 8 reviews. Pure Storage FlashBlade is rated 8.6, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Pure Storage FlashBlade writes "An easy to use solution with a straightforward setup and good speed". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Simplifies my storage integration by replacing multiple storage systems". Pure Storage FlashBlade is most compared with Pure Storage FlashArray, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Qumulo, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with VMware vSAN, ScaleIO and LizardFS. See our Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,196 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
The most valuable feature of this solution is performance.Using this solution has made our backups more reliable.The most valuable features include the ease of implementation, ease of use and the speed that you can do backup and recovery on.The initial setup is pretty easy and simple.We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it.We can capacity plan at a greater level than we used to.It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams.The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage.

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 would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution.I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution.In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does.The speed could be improved.I have not seen ROI.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.On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge.They need better integration with public clouds along with a better hybrid solution.

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
Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc.Our licensing is renewed annually.I have seen ROI. It has allowed me to increase the density of my VMs without having to purchase anything additional.We used a reseller for the purchase.Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO.

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 File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
382,196 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
2nd
Views
1,768
Comparisons
847
Reviews
13
Average Words per Review
409
Avg. Rating
8.7
1st
Views
25,237
Comparisons
18,663
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
258
Avg. Rating
8.9
Top Comparisons
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Also Known As
Ceph
Learn
Pure Storage
Red Hat
Overview

FlashBlade is the industry’s most advanced scale-out storage for unstructured data, powered by a modern, massively parallel architecture to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) and accelerate tomorrow’s discoveries and insights.

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 Pure Storage FlashBlade
Learn more about Red Hat Ceph Storage
Sample Customers
ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHLDell, DreamHost
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm27%
University18%
Health, Wellness And Fitness Company9%
Comms Service Provider9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company27%
Manufacturing Company19%
Financial Services Firm9%
Wholesaler/Distributor7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company33%
Comms Service Provider19%
Manufacturing Company9%
Media Company6%
Find out what your peers are saying about Pure Storage FlashBlade vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,196 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email