Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with NetApp EF-Series All Flash Arrays.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
I would like to have the ability to replicate data between All Flash and other NetApp storage systems. Better monitoring should be implemented.
The price of the All Flash solution is very high.
There is a lot of room for improvement. What I don't like is that they do not create barriers in the areas. The data management is based on the software and they do not use segmentation on the storage. That is the main problem - there is no segmentation. You cannot segment the data on the database. You put the data there but you don't know where the data goes on each disk. The information will be there but there is no segmentation. There needs to be improvement in data segmentation. In future releases, I'd like to see federation and segmentation. Those are the big problems with NetApp at the moment. Compared to HP, Dell and HPE 3PAR, they cannot do the federation which is very important. We have to do remote replication and work with two or more storage sites in different locations. If I have a site and I have a second or third site - they require working federation and NetApp cannot do this right now.
For us, in our country, the solution is a bit expensive. They should try to work on a better pricing model for our market. NetApp could improve the speed of the rebuilding rate.
We cannot share data in what is described as a trunk port, which is a disadvantage. Technical support is an area that needs improvement. In the next release, I would like to have staged access. The administrator would be able to connect to all of the storage and see real-time performance and issues, not only in the web interface. If the administrator is working on the console they should have access to all interfaced controllers.
We need a center related to NetApp in Egypt so that we can deal with them directly. If the pricing of equipment were more discounted in Egypt then it would be better. The implementation could be faster.
The pricing could be cheaper and it should have documentation in more languages, specifically, Russian. They should develop faster building for the next release.
The product might be improved with additional features for encryption. I think they do not do enough with encryption and that would make it more flexible and useful. I would also like to features that better support the product implementation with cloud solutions. If the problem we need to resolve is with cloud solutions, the product is not so easy compared to other products for easily integrating the cloud data. A cloud solution is important to implement.
Off the top of my head, I can't think of any improvements other than perhaps better integration with some of our Cisco products.
One thing that may need to improve is the software monitoring as it is based on a work station that is serviced to give support to the management. The manager may not be as fast on board the controller, so it needs something else to make it easier to manage. Managing the storage is, therefore, the only single point of failure.