Compare StorPool vs. SwiftStack

StorPool is ranked 6th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 5 reviews while SwiftStack is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 6 reviews. StorPool is rated 9.8, while SwiftStack is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of StorPool writes "Gives us top performance from our cloud service with low latency". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SwiftStack writes "Gives us the flexibility to buy hardware from any vendor, and reduces our storage admin costs". StorPool is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, ScaleIO and LizardFS, whereas SwiftStack is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, Scality and Cloudian HyperStore.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
StorPool Logo
3,136 views|1,248 comparisons
SwiftStack Logo
1,826 views|918 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The team behind it was very engaged and had the skills and ability to support a service provider.The two 10GE networks provide redundancy and increased performance as they serve as two separate networks doubling the throughput and doing multipathing and load balancing. We now have a high performance shared storage system which enables us to run on private cloud. Our previous system used bare-metal hardware, which provided high performance but inflexible management. Now we have best of both worlds, SSD-class performance with flexibility of a private cloud system.With StorPool we were able to build live failover on top of our LXC infrastructure. This allows us both to live-migrate containers between compute nodes without any downtime and, in case of an entire node suffering any type of failure, we can bring all containers back online within a minute on a spare compute node.The speed of the storage solution also allows us to provide service to applications that are ‚Äčvery I/O ‚Äčintensive.

Read more »

The SwiftStack Controller, which is the web UI, provides out of band management. This has been one of the best features of it. It allows us to be able to do upgrades and look at performance metrics. It is a top feature and reason to choose the product.The most valuable feature is its versatility. We use 1space and we can use it for almost anything: for our cloud service, for backups of VMs.SwiftStack is also quite flexible when it comes to hardware. It depends, of course, on the use case and the kind of hardware you want to buy. But you have quite a bit of choice in hardware. The SwiftStack software itself does not impose anything on you.It has helped us with the ability to distribute data to different data centers. As part of our DR strategy, we have nodes automatically replicating data from one data center to the other. This makes it easier for us to not have to shift tapes around.The general consensus on what we've done is that the restores coming back from it have been faster than they were from our prior vendor. Ingest speeds are fine. The restore speeds have improved.The scalability is phenomenal. It seems infinite, as long as you put enough storage in place, add enough nodes.The performance is good. It is a secondary storage platform designed for archive and backup, so performance for the right use cases is very good. We have been pretty happy in that regard.The biggest feature, the biggest reason we went with SwiftStack, rather than deploying our own model with OpenStack Swift, was their deployment model. That was really the primary point in our purchase decision, back when we initially deployed. It took my installation time from days to hours, for deployment in our environment, versus deploying OpenStack Swift ourselves, manually.

Read more »

Cons
Monitoring and statistics UI is a bit clumsy.At times we need to check the disks and do some minor operations. A friendlier user interface would be useful in such cases.It would be good if, with next releases, StorPool provide a better GUI for monitoring and statistics. This would make our experience even better and complete.he only place we feel they could improve is the time it takes to bring new features to production.

Read more »

The file access needs improvement. The NFS was rolled out as a single service. It needs to be fully integrated into the proxy in a highly available fashion, like the regular proxy access is. I know it's on the roadmap.At the moment we are using Erasure coding in an 8+4 setting. What would be nice is if, for some standard configurations like 15+4 and 8+4, there were more versatility so we could, for example, select 8+6, or the like.On the controller features, there needs to be a bit more clean up of the user interface. There are a lot of options available on the GUI which might be better organized or compartmentalized. There are times when you are going through the user interface and you have to look around for where the setting may be. A little bit more attention to the organization of the user interface would be helpful.They should provide a more concise hardware calculator when you're putting your capacity together.I would like to see better client integrations, support for a broader client library. SwiftStack could be a little bit more involved in the client side: Python, Java, C, etc.The biggest room for improvement is the maturity of the proxyFS solution. That piece of code is relatively new, so most of our issues have been around the proxyFS.[One] thing that I've been looking for, for years as an end user and customer, for any object store, including SwiftStack, is some type of automated method for data archiving. Something where you would have a metadata tagging policy engine and a data mover all built into a single system that would automatically be able to take your data off your primary and put it into an object store in a non-proprietary way - which is key.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
StorPool software is cost-effective and gives us a pricing advantage over our competitors.StorPool's pricing and licensing model is very transparent. As always, one has to due his due diligence when choosing a product like distributed storage solutions.

Read more »

We are able to dynamically grow storage at a lower cost. We can repurpose hardware and buy commodity hardware. There is a huge cost savings, on average $100,000 a year compared to traditional storage for what we have at our size.The pricing model is great and makes sense. We have talked about how to get into more of a frequent billing cycle than once a year. That would be an interesting concept to add into the product, having the ability to have monthly billing instead of having to do a one-year licensing renewal. However, the way the license works by charging for storage consumed is definitely what makes them the most competitive.Dollar per gigabyte, it costs us more because we are storing more. However, if you look at it from a cost per gigabyte perspective, we have dropped our costs significantly.We find the pricing rather steep. Of course, you get quality for your money, that's absolutely true... [But] when you look at the prices of the licensing and the prices of your hardware, it's quite substantial.The annual support and maintenance costs compared to our old solution for backups had about a two-thirds savings, so about a 60% annual savings on our support and maintenance contract. That savings funded additional expansion for what it was costing us for the support and maintenance contracts on old solution.The pricing and licensing are capacity-based, so it's hard to put my finger on them, because so many different vendors charge in different ways. We are still saving significantly over any of the other options that we evaluated because we can choose the best hardware at the best price, then put SwiftStack software on it. So, it's hard to complain, even though a part of me goes, "It would be nicer if it were less expensive."We have had a 40 to 50 percent reduction in CAPEX on the acquisition of new hardware, which is probably conservative.COST_SAVING; We have had a 40 to 50 percent reduction in CAPEX on the acquisition of new hardware, which is probably conservative.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Software Defined Storage solutions are best for your needs.
382,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
3,136
Comparisons
1,248
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
465
Avg. Rating
9.8
3rd
Views
1,826
Comparisons
918
Reviews
6
Average Words per Review
1,837
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Compared 48% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 40% of the time.
Compared 26% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Learn
StorPool
SwiftStack
Video Not Available
Overview

StorPool is intelligent storage software that runs on standard servers and builds scalable, high-performance storage system out of these servers (software-defined storage). It focuses on the block-level storage and excels at it. It is incredibly flexible and can be deployed in both converged setups (on compute nodes, alongside VMs and applications) or on separate storage nodes.

StorPool has advanced fully-distributed architecture and is arguably the fastest and most efficient block-storage software on the market today. It is the best storage system when building a cloud.

SwiftStack enables you to do more with storage. Store more data, enable more applications and serve more users. We do this by delivering a proven object storage solution that's built on an open-source core and is fully enterprise ready. Our object storage software is an alternative to complex, expensive, on-premises hardware-based storage solutions. SwiftStack delivers the features and flexibility you need to easily manage and scale object storage behind your firewall. Customers are demanding storage where they can pay as they grow, find it is easier to consume, and can infinitely scale. Today, our customers use SwiftStack for archiving active data, serving web content, building private clouds, sharing documents and storing backups.
Offer
Learn more about StorPool
Learn more about SwiftStack
Sample Customers
CloudSigma, Kualo, Togglebox, Neterra, Serveo, Superhosting.bg, GroupOne, DRFortress, Metanet, Dia, Server Storage SolutionsPac-12 Networks, Georgia Institute of Technology, Budd Van Lines
We monitor all Cloud Software Defined 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