HPE StorageWorks MSA Reviews

We are using virtualization and we use this storage for hosting workloads. We have our own workloads, as well as some for our customers.

It has provided much larger capacities to the existing virtualized environments. we have added 4 additional enclosures as well. 

The most valuable features are the storage levels and snapshot features.

We also use some of the other common features like zoning control, IO metering, and input/output control. 

This product is getting a little bit older, so new features like deduplication are not included. We would like to see the environment updated.

We have been using HPE StorageWorks MSA for more than five years.

This is a very stable product.

We have had hard drives fail, although stability was not an issue because RAID manages situations like this. We simply notify the vendor, they come in and replace it in the background, and the matter is solved.

The scalability is very good. This environment is part of our infrastructure. We are an internet service provider (ISP), so we have our own infrastructure hosted. This includes our link monitoring systems and the authentication service center. We also host a large number of customer workloads on virtual machines, which are all running on this system.

The local HPE support has always been good.

We currently have storage arrays by both HPE and Dell. The product from Dell is the PowerVault system.

We will be purchasing an all-flash array, as well. The requirement is due to the high demand for our customers' environments that are using heavy IO.

The initial setup is straightforward and the deployment is very quick.

We deployed it ourselves, and we had a little bit of support from the vendor. It was not complex because our environment was simple, so we configured it. When we had a doubt about something, we contacted the vendor, but otherwise completed it on our own.

This solution involves a one-time CapEx payment, followed by warranty extensions.

HPE was the initial product that we evaluated. We were content with it, so we went straight to implementing it.

So far, our experience with this product has been great. We've had a small number of issues such as a hard disk failure, but that is manageable with RAID so it has not been a problem. This is a product that I recommend for others.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for NAS and SAN storage. We have 30 users who access storage daily. 

We do not plan to increase usage in the short term but plan to do a technology refresh in a few years. 

The solution is pretty transparent and works well. 

The solution requires hardware. 

I have been using the solution for a few years. 

The stability is okay, not too bad. The solution has a very specific use to provide storage so as long as it does not fail, everything is good.

The solution is scalable and you can add additional bays. At some stage, you will need additional TCs.

I have not needed technical support. 

Our company did not previously use another solution. 

The setup is pretty straightforward. 

The solution is hardware so you just have to build the functions of the system including the RAID. It takes a little while, but is straightforward. 

We utilize vendors or system integrators for implementations. 

The solution can be a bit expensive. I rate pricing an eight out of ten. 

I inherited the last generation solution when I joined the team, but am currently looking to move toward hyper-converged solutions. In essence, I want to reduce the footprint and maximize the server.

I am exploring whether HCI can work with the current hardware and reduce the need for additional hardware by using local storage on the server. I want to understand the technology to do a proper comparison. 

I am looking at StorMagic and other options to determine how they reduce the SAN or distribute storage in the ESXI environment. 

The solution is a capable product that does what it is supposed to do. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We primarily use this solution for our CCTV cameras and systems.

The solution's most valuable aspect, for our organization, is its stability.

The product is very easy to deploy.

We've found that the solution overall offers very simple management capabilities.

The monitoring capabilities of the product are very good.

The integration capacity is excellent. We were able to easily integrate the solution with both Microsoft and Linux operating systems. 

We are only really using the solution for CCTV purposes. It's very basic. We don't need a lot of bells and whistles. Therefore, for our purposes, we aren't really finding anything that is lacking.

It would be ideal if there was a better management interface. The solution should allow for integration with Java.

We've been using the solution for about five years at this point. It's been a while.

The stability of the product is excellent. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's reliable. It's been very good, performance-wise.

We've never tested that scalability. We've never tried to upgrade the service or expand it. Therefore, it wouldn't be possible to comment on its capabilities or our experiences.

We have different IP cameras. There are around 450. In terms of operators, we have just three.

We do plan to continue to use the solution, at least for the next two years or so.

We haven't really contacted technical support too much. We had to reach out once for patching. They were very helpful and the process was very fast. We were satisfied with the level of service provided.

We did not previously use a different solution. This was our first implementation.

The initial setup is quite straightforward. It's very easy to deploy in general. It's not complex at all. A company shouldn't run into any problems during the process.

We were able to integrate it with different operating systems without a problem.

The entire implementation took about one day. It wasn't too long of a process.

I was able to manage the implementation myself. I did not need the assistance of integrators or consultants.

We don't pay monthly or yearly license fees.

I would rate the solution ten out of ten. It's a very good, simple entry-level storage system that allows for the separation of operations. We've been only using basic aspects of the solution, and only for CCTV, however, it has provided us with everything we've need and we are quite satisfied with its performance.

When we purchased this solution, we work looking to go from a standalone VMware server to a full-fledged host. We have two hosts and we have the SAN, and so it was the most cost-effective at the time for us, as beginners with SAN technology.

We are currently looking to replace this with a newer product because of its age.

The most valuable features were the dual controllers and being able to expand it.

The support contract is expensive, although they are very responsive.

We have been using the HPE MSA 1040 for almost six years.

This is a very stable product.

We have two of these units and we replicate between them with our sister company.

When we purchased it, we had some open drive bays. If we had needed to expand then we could have, but we never had the need to do so.

HP's technical support is great and they helped us with everything.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

We paid somebody to take care of the deployment. For both sites, it took about a week to complete.

When we bought this solution it was very reasonably priced and they were willing to deal.

The ongoing support is expensive and they get a good amount of money, but they are so responsive that I don't mind paying for it.

Our shortlist to replace this solution includes products from SimpliVity, Nimble, and Pure Storage.

This is a good product and everything I needed it to do, it did and still does.

My advice for anybody who is implementing the MSA is to hire somebody to deploy it if you don't have the staff.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

• Data progression!
• Volume draining.
• Dual controllers.

Was purchased as a DR solution but became our production SAN. Very fast and easy to use. A great SAN for SMB's with enterprise features.

• GUI can be improved
• Firmware updates need improvement
• Hardware could use a little refinement. (The fiber ports on one controller pushed through the case causing us to replace that controller under warranty.

3 months and going very well.

Old interface has no progression. New interface does. Nothing spells this out and needed to be discovered.

None. Very stable product.

None. Running 7k drives and 10K drives with SSD caching.

Very good.

Dell Compellent SAN. Shelves were going on 6 years old. Switching to 3PAR but needed a temporary space.

Very easy and straightforward.

In-house. Very easy to install.

Easy to manage, it’s reliable for us, and fits our environment. Also, support is available when we need it. It’s just been very solid for us.

We’re down to one vendor for most of our hardware and software, so using HP already helps us streamline our internal workings.

In the future we'd like to see more block-based storage. This is because more and more storage is moving in that direction.

Very stable.

For our environment, you can scale several times and that’s exactly what we need. You can’t go beyond four servers for the SaaS connected version, but for us that’s what we needed exactly.

Technical support on the phone is fine and storage has been very good overall.

We’re like an ASP. HP has been the standard we’ve been using for a while, so we continued. Their SaaS connected storage is what we’ve been using more recently because it fits our environment perfectly.

Very straightforward and we’ve got about eight of these setup. We had it delivered to the site and just plugged it in for the customer.

We also looked at Dell, but HP was a better fit and the pricing was better.

Look at reliability primarily. Pricing is also important.

Experience with the interface is very important. Make sure that technical support is available and good. Again, it's about performance and cost and it does a rock solid job for us.

We use HPE StorageWorks MSA as our central storage for our VMware clusters.

The solution is very easy to use, it is not really complex for any user, such as non-technical individuals. We have found it simple to guide our customers when needed. The interface is user-friendly and it is not difficult to configure.

The solution could improve by adding configuration tools.

I have been using HPE StorageWorks MSA for approximately 10 years.

The solution is stable.

I have found the solution to be scalable.

We have approximately 20 customers using this solution.

The support engineers are knowledgeable and resposive.

The installation is straightforward. The time of the installation depends on the environment. However, it typically takes less than one hour.

We use three HPE engineers that do the implementation of the solution.

The price of the solution is a little high and they should provide more competitive pricing. If you want to increases the storage size there are additional fees.

This is an entry-level storage system and I would recommend it to others.

I rate HPE StorageWorks MSA an eight out of ten.

We use HPE StorageWorks MSA for normal servers and as a storage utility.

The cost to performance for HPE StorageWorks MSA is good.

The one feature we value most about HPE StorageWorks MSA is stability.

HPE StorageWorks MSA could maybe include a pay-top of texture feature or something like job replication.

The prices are low. HPE StorageWorks MSA is better than other products.

I would rate HPE StorageWorks MSA eight over 10 because just for our use it is okay.