We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ceph Storage and StarWind Virtual SAN 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 most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
"We use the solution for cloud storage."
"The community support is very good."
"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."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"The ROI is great on this product."
"Virtualizing data infrastructure with StarWind Virtual SAN improves efficiency and reduces operational costs."
"It also provides a seamless and efficient solution for personal storage requirements, showcasing the versatility and scalability of my Virtual SAN configuration."
"It has improved our organization in terms of its uptime as our main cluster has never been offline due to a SAN failure."
"The StarWind Virtual SAN management console is intuitive and easy to use."
"StarWind Virtual SAN is essentially hardware agnostic, allowing us to build out a specific hardware layer based upon the customer's unique requirements."
"Immediately we noticed huge performance gains, even on older hardware and once we implemented a 10GB link between both servers, the sync was near-instant after the initial sync was complete."
"The solution offers easy one-click PowerShell scripts that are ready to run."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"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."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"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."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"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."
"This solution should be more self-sufficient, running without creating domains or failover clusters."
"A mobile app to sync up for overview and status would really be helpful."
"I would like to see an extensive set of cmdlets that could allow for easier automation as well as status management."
"The configuration can a bit cumbersome."
"StarWind relies on the underlying OS to manage the "SAN files" whether that would be a RAID volume, software RAID (such as LVM), etc. It would be useful if StarWind could incorporate the actual physical drive management inside of the solution, similar to Storage Spaces Direct."
"I would say that the documentation is mostly great, however, some features could be expanded upon a bit."
"StarWind doesn't really have any performance reporting, especially compared with other vSAN products we've used."
"I'd love to see more clarification for us folks who are smart enough to do some damage yet not smart enough to use CLI."
Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 21 reviews while StarWind Virtual SAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 182 reviews. Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.0, while StarWind Virtual SAN is rated 9.6. 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 StarWind Virtual SAN writes "Excellent support, great performance, and good redundancy". Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Intel DAOS, whereas StarWind Virtual SAN is most compared with VMware vSAN, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, StorMagic SvSAN, DataCore SANsymphony and HPE SimpliVity. See our Red Hat Ceph Storage vs. StarWind Virtual SAN report.
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.
