Dell EMC Unity XT reviews

We had old systems - CX4-960 and Celerra - and we wanted to consolidate the systems to the Unity platform for the customer because the old systems were very expensive for maintenance.

The only reason we made this move was to save costs, to be honest.

It's easy to handle for administrators and it's a unified system. It's not as complex as Celerra systems or CX4 Clariions to administrate. You can do everything with one GUI.

In the next release, I would like to see stable performance on AIX. AIX are mostly mission-critical systems, so the support has to be there.

We have had a lot of issues. We've got massive issues at the moment with IBM AIX. It's not stable. We have a lot of disk errors, production crashes sometimes, and that's not good for a retailer.

Also, we still have to administer the Celerra because we have massive issues with the filer system of Unity. We hope it gets better with the 4.2 or 4.3 release. We do not have the integration for connection to Centara. This means we have to keep the data on Celerra and cannot migrate to Unity.

Scalability is not good. We have a Unity 300, now we have to do a data-in-place conversion for the next upgrade because only 150 slots are supported, not drives, only slots. So my job next week is to do an in-place upgrade from 300 to 400.

The setup was complex but it was one of the first Unity systems in Germany. We sold it in August two years ago.

If you plan to use Unity as a filer system take a bigger controller because with the 300 and 400 you have performance issues compared with other filer systems. For pure filer systems, I would recommend an Isilon or NetApp, or something like that. Unity is a unified solution, if you have to do unified, but it's better to separate if you have more data.

Primary use case is mid-range to low-end storage, and it performs very well for that type of operation.

We just recently put together a large customer deal. They're going to use Unity's for applications at remote sites, so it's essentially a robo operation. Its main advantage over vSAN was the rebuild, the intelligence of the restoration in the event of a hardware drive failure and, of course, the all-flash solution.

The flexibility of the paradigm and, obviously, its price point.

I'd like to see more of the NVMe back-end for the flash. And the big deal with the PowerMax is that they've used all U2 drives so that they can avoid having to take it down. I see using M.2 and modular sections as being a real nice alternative that could be implemented in Unity at a fairly low cost.

Obviously, we haven't had it in the field for years, but we haven't had any problems with it and we've deployed close to 150 of them.

It's not really scalable. Up to mid-range requirements, it's just fine. But scalability takes you to the enterprise-class, and that's more high-end VNX or low-end Symmetrix.

We've used technical support but it wasn't Unity's fault, it was the customer's. The tech support is very good.

Setup is simple.

For our applications, we'd rate Unity at eight out of 10. It would be a 10 if it had a lower cost. That's really the issue. The value point is, once you get into the Unity spectrum, you're looking at a lot of competitive offerings, and they're appealing to a limited class requirement, so the demands are not as stringent.

In terms of advice, find out what your storage group's expertise level is and their background, and then see if they don't already have experience with Unity or one of the others in the family. It seems to be a natural fit that way.

As a partner, we are able to deploy it across multiple industries: healthcare, government, small business. We install Unity everywhere. There is really no one, set, niche customer that we do it for.

• Starting small and being able to grow to a larger scale
• All-flash options are great
• Hybrid options are good for certain use cases

The code revisions. I think that they could do a better job of testing on the back-end, for the code revisions. I've heard of some issues down the line where people have upgraded to the latest code and there were bugs in it, and they had to release a subsequent code fix. More testing on the Dell EMC side, for when they release those code revisions, would be a good idea.

It is stable. I have not personally seen any issues when deploying in a customer environment.

Technical support has gotten worse since the merger, for example, response time to SR creation. And mainly, if I ask for a solution, they'll send me a white paper and say, "Here, just do it, here's a KB article." They seem to be more hands-off, and they just want to let the customer or the partner deal with it.

Another big thing that is somewhat upsetting is that they got rid of partner support, installation support. We really liked that. Being a partner and installing, if we run into issues while on site, with doing any type of work, we don't have a number to call anymore, a direct line. We have to go through the same process, and that process is terrible, still.

Most of the customers that I have are old VNX customers, and they want to replace their VNX with the latest and greatest, so they go to Unity. The Unity is a VNXE but on steroids. That's the main use that I see, just part of a refresh cycle, and they want to refresh with the Unity's.

It's very simple to set up. No issues with the setup.

Nothing is ever a perfect 10 in my book, so I would say this solution is a seven. I think there is room for improvement, there is always going to be room for improvement, especially in IT. Having a perfect 10 in any IT hardware platform, I don't it think that exists right now.

The simplicity of the technology means it is easier for my team to do administration, to deliver.

The technology is simple and it is efficient.

The product is reliable.

It is scalable. For example, at this moment I have a large customer, a government ministry in Costa Rica. We have two Unity's with services for transactions on different scales. It has grown over the course of six months. 

From my experience, EMC provides good support, and Dell's service is very good. It is simple to call technical support and they immediately respond.

With EMC technology, you don't really need support. We have been dealing with EMC for 14 years. We were the first company in Costa Rica to use EMC. We have 14 or 15 devices and we no have problems with this technology.

My technical personnel have implemented different fixes or upgrades. I have good internal technical support in my company.

• Small device
• Using few U's on rack
• Small consumption of energy
• Fast access on data

The best improvement will happen in the future. We will hopefully not be replacing the HDD with failure.

The price has room for improvement.

I have used this product since May 2017.

Not at all. No issues with stability.

I will need to see in the future. I do not have time for scalability for the time being to determine whether it can scale out.

It decreased the amount of time to deploy and we recognized the ROI quicker. The ability to use a single piece of hardware simplifies the overall administration.

Unified block and file storage without the need of control stations and data movers. This simplifies administration and deployment and requires less rack space.

• Increased flexibility in the GUI to provision storage easier
• Include cloud-based replication for blocks

We didn’t encounter any stability issues.

We didn’t encounter any scalability issues.

Technical support was pretty good. However, the Dell/EMC merger has been challenging across the board.

We were using EMC VNX. We switched because this was a newer version of an aging technology.

The initial setup was straightforward and easy. It is simple with a single IP. It recognizes arrays without pre-populating with IP addresses.

The price is good for commercial grade storage arrays. Licensing has changed to be more advantageous for users.

We didn’t have any alternatives in mind.

If you are looking for a unified solution for block and file and to be competitive in the all-flash market, this is the product to choose.

I'm a data center solution architect at Merdasco and based on our customers' needs, we build solutions for them. This product is very flexible, powerful, and suitable for many environments.

Dell EMC Unity OE provides block LUN, VMware Virtual Volumes (VVols), and NAS file system storage access. Multiple, different storage resources can reside in the same storage pool, and multiple storage pools can be configured within the same DPE/DAE array.

Dell EMC Unity is designed for performance and optimized for efficiency. This product is perfect for small, and mid-range customers who need to pay less, but still, get enterprise-level capabilities.

This product needs to have better integration with enterprise backup solutions and archiving devices. Also, it would be improved with better flexibility for replicating with third-party SAN storage products. There are some SAN solutions that help customers to manage their data centers easier than the past.

I've been using this product since 2016 in my customer's data centers.

Small and medium-sized companies can benefit from this product.

Today's mid-range SAN storage is designed with a mixture of some high-end features and enhancement can address new IT demands and EMC Unity XT is also one of them.

If you have access to customers service EMC is one of the best and you could benefit from the knowledge center of EMC and its community 

Based on my experiences there are some SAN products, same quality as Dell EMC Unity. and two parameters help to choose witch SAN solution for which company.
First: What are the requirements of the customer?
Second: What are the differences between storage solutions?

The initial setup of this product is very easy and after some steps, everything is ready to start provisioning it for datacenter servers.

I have implemented this solution through the in-house team. 

This solution has just released and time can say how it could be valuable and stabe in the customer's area.

This product is suitable for customers who are looking for simplicity and cost-effective SAN storage products

I have compared some similar solutions such as 3par and HDS VSP G Series. Among all the mid-range I have known EMC Unity XT series are designed for new IT requirements such as cloud compatibility, NVME ready, and capacity growth.

It's a good idea to add some features to this storage such as better integration with container-based services.

It is for users of VDI solutions.

• We use it to implement all our VDI solutions.
• It is easy to deploy and manage.
• We were able to integrate it very quickly with other solutions.

• Cheaper
• Its consumption of kVA

I would like to see more compression and deduplication added to the solution. Today, our compression is about 2:1 and other solutions give us about 4:1 or 5:1.

Technical support is good.

The initial setup is good.

Ordering is easy, but the processing site and working with those companies was difficult.