We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and Scality RING 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."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."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"The community support is very good."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"We use the solution for cloud storage."
"The most valuable feature of Scality RING8 is its performance and good interface."
"Another feature I like is the life cycle management that helps me with data storage efficiency."
"I think it's the economic factor. This solution has the lowest cost for storage systems."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"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."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
"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."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"Scality RING8 could improve by having more features. We have to use two automation tools to meet our needs. We would prefer to use only one."
"When we used this solution in 2015, it was not scalable at all. I don't know if they have improved on that, but at the time, scalability was just horrible."
"Scality RING is not easy to learn for someone new. It is a little bit difficult. There are a lot of components to it, and you also need to understand them to work with it effectively."
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews while Scality RING is ranked 16th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 4 reviews. Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2, while Scality RING is rated 7.8. 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 Scality RING writes "Offers UTIPI (Unified Tiered Infrastructure Per IOPS) feature in billing but lacks extensive testing ". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, whereas Scality RING is most compared with Dell ECS, MinIO, Qumulo, Cloudian HyperStore and NetApp StorageGRID. See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. Scality RING report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors and best File and Object 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.
