We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and ScaleIO [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about StarWind, Nutanix, Red Hat and others in Software Defined Storage (SDS)."Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."
"I like the distributed and self-healing nature of the product."
"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."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"The community support is very good."
"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."
"Compared to other products in this category that are competing with Dell EMC, Dell seems to us to always come out on top."
"They know how to clearly present any important data, including data flow and each drive's IOPS/bandwidth; and allow the user to easily monitor bottlenecks and problems"
"Automatic rebalancing is the feature saving administration time."
"We are using it as the primary virtualization storage (both for internal corporate users and external customers) for VMware and Hyper-V virtualization platforms."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."
"Ceph does not deal very well with, or takes a long time to recover from, certain kinds of network failures and individual storage node failures."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"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."
"If they could introduce a write cache feature, the product would be perfect overall."
"Ecosystem around the product: There is no built-in system for viewing history data, such as volume IOPS. We have to provide graphing by Prometheus and Grafana, which would be a good new feature in ScaleIO."
"There is room for improvement in the area of horizontal scaling."
"It would be nice to set minimum IOPS per volume, besides just the maximum, to be able to satisfy this demand from customers out-of-the-box, not by calculating number of disks, etc."
Earn 20 points
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews while ScaleIO [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Software Defined Storage (SDS). Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2, while ScaleIO [EOL] is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScaleIO [EOL] writes "Meets our customers' needs but they should move towards high-level scaling". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and NetApp StorageGRID, whereas ScaleIO [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.
