During our performance tests, we experimented with the system using twenty-four drives to gauge its performance capabilities. We haven't utilized the system with more than twenty-four drives.

It is a highly scalable solution since it allows you to add more storage easily. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My organization has 315 users of NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays.

We haven't had to scale it, but I'm sure it will scale.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. It's best fit for mid-range and high-end enterprise clients. 

It has two models. The EF300 model caters to lower-end to mid-range, while the EF600 is for highly scalable enterprise solutions. So, medium and enterprise benefit most.

It can also be offered for lower-end solutions. If a customer or organization is small, it can be scaled from small to enterprise.

I would rate the scalability of NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays a ten out of ten.

All of our IT specialist department is using the solution, which is approximately 10 people.

In terms of scalability, it's okay. 

But they do have one problem with scalability - they cannot do federation of storage.

Our solution is actually focused on breaking the pieces into a manageable vertical, where we focus on performance. When it begins to have a little bit of latency, we start to split it out. That's scalability on the application side. Infrastructure-wise, we design that way because we know NetApp can meet certain requirements that we have. Beyond that, maybe not, so we have to design our application to work around that.

We have around 3,000 users. We plan to increase the usage of this product.

Compared to Dell Unity XT, what I see as an advantage in NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays is the fact that it is more scalable. You can get a box from the same series of NetApp if you want one and a half petabytes of space. Owing to the aforementioned reasons, I recommend the solution to bigger companies.

We haven't scaled it yet. We haven't added any storage to it yet, but I've worked with these arrays in the past, and I know they're pretty easy to scale out.

Everything we've wanted to do, scale-wise, it's done. We started off with one shelf, got about 2,000 VDIs on it; put another shelf in, not a problem. It was about as easy as you can make it.

The solution is scalable.

We haven't done too much with scalability yet in our environment, so I don't really know. From my point of view, I can't answer that one.

I am not very familiar with how well it scales. Ever since I started it's been the same so we haven't really grown into it.

Not very scalable.

From what we've seen, it looks like it's going to be easy to upgrade. We haven't scaled it up.

It definitely meets our needs. What we hope for is that it all flies fast and once we get it in that we don't have to scale, because right now we have requirements of random 50 terabytes here and 100 terabytes there, so the ability to not need to scale and hopefully receive the benefits of the new features in 9.3 of reducing your footprint.

This solution is scalable.

We haven't really tested the scalability options. Only I use this solution. We have around 1,000 clients using the database. 

It is scalable. We're about to roll it into our other NetApp products. That, along with the FAS system, makes it scalable for us, at least.

We have not had to expand the product yet. We sized it for what we thought was going to be growth for three years, and we have not outgrown it yet, so I don't see an issue with it.

We've never tried to scale it because the size of it's been good, so I wouldn't really know.

It has scaled to our needs.

We haven't had the use for needing to scale it up as we're going, so it's just kind of been as it is.

We'll find out about scalability. I think it will be perfect. We have small sites. We just purchased a big site, a half-a-million dollar site, for Plymouth, Michigan. We'll find out how that works out, scaling up from that point. We used to do the shelves, the SATA shelves, the SAS shelves and so on. Flash is completely new and any SSD drives is all completely different to us. It will be interesting.

We have 50 users, some are administrators and others are different businesses.

I think the scalability of the solution is really good. We can scale with the space, but not with the computation capabilities or with the controllers. I believe the reason for this is that it is an old style storage system. There are some new products on the market that are more agile and more scalable. 

I am not sure how many users our customer has, but I think it is about 100 users. The scalability would depend on the kind of VM system they're working on.

It seems easy to expand, but we haven't had the need to do that yet.

We mostly deal with medium-sized organizations.

This solution is scalable. We have more than 500 users in our company.

We also have plans to extend its capacity.

Scalability is very good.

The EF-Series is not the most scalable solution. However, I think it is a good compromise considering the features and the caliber of the solution for this type of model and how we use it.

This solution is scalable and you can just add more storage.