We performed a comparison between IBM Spectrum Scale and VMware vSAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The high performance of the solution is its most valuable aspect. If you compare it to other storage solutions, it's much better."
"It has been pretty reliable throughout the years. As far as capacity is concerned, it can handle most heavy loads."
"It is incredibly scalable and stable."
"We are using it for monitoring all of our storage."
"Allows us to share files across multiple environments."
"Technical support has been very helpful. They provide us with pretty good solutions that we can implement moving forward."
"We can have multiple systems within the same file system."
"Its great servicing high availability. That is what it is used for."
"I think vSAN's stability is good. It's an underlying solution for both on-prem and in the cloud, especially the VMC on AWS stuff too. VMware has been around for a long time, so it's pretty stable."
"vSAN provides default HA configurations, where if any host goes down, the VM moves around within the host. Even though the disks are local, the VMs moves around with the vSAN disk and vSAN provides a high availability on its own."
"I like the orchestration feature."
"Being hyperconverged, it simplifies what equipment we have to buy."
"The solution is quite stable."
"The valuable features are its scalability and the standardization - one size fits all. It's also intuitive and easy to use because one size fits all. Obviously, it scales out, but it's the same solution at every physical location I manage."
"We find it easy to deliver this solution."
"The feature we have found most valuable is the compatibility of VMware products with VCF and VMware Cloud Foundation."
"We do have some issues where Spectrum Scale does not work as expected. We have seen our Spectrum Scale servers go down unexpectedly, but because we have a cluster, it does not take out the entire organization."
"They should probably simply the Red Hat implementation portion. This portion was not as straightforward as I would like it to be."
"The biggest problem is that it is not able to provide block storage."
"Making it a little easier to add bad file sets would help. There is a transition to how you add storage and how you add a file set, so making that a little smoother would probably be my recommendation."
"Integration with other vendors is not available."
"I believe there is no graphic user interface, so they should include it."
"The pricing and licensing model for this solution are complex and it is sometimes difficult to explain it to customers."
"The main issue that we have now is with the encryption. They want to use more metrics in encryption, which is not working very well."
"The platform's cost affects the business. This particular area needs improvement."
"The main problem we had was hardware compatibility, finding the right hardware that was certified."
"I think it needs to be more cost-effective. I would also say that even though the capacity is good, there is also room for improvement there. Also, they could improve the security of the system."
"If we have some complicated issues, you have to use the command lines interface. Not everything is possible to be fixed in the GUI. This is a drawback, that some things have to be fixed via command-line interface and should be able to be done in the GUI."
"I would love to see vSAN integrate Persistent Memory and NVDIMMs. I know they're supposed to be working on an elastic tier so that we don't have the issues with destaging from the cache to the capacity. Those are the things that I'm interested in."
"I would like to see it be more hardware-agnostic. Other than that, the only other complication is - and it has gotten better with the newer versions - that lately, once you're running an all-flash, if you need to grow or scale down your infrastructure, it's a long process. You need to evacuate all data and make sure you have enough space on the host, then add more hosts or take out hosts. That process is a little bit complex. You cannot scale as needed or shrink as needed."
"he list of hardware supported should be increased in the future."
"While I like the replication and compression features, there is a problem with them running too slowly."
IBM Spectrum Scale is ranked 7th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 10 reviews while VMware vSAN is ranked 2nd in HCI with 227 reviews. IBM Spectrum Scale is rated 8.4, while VMware vSAN is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Scale writes "A stable solution with valuable profile-sharing features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSAN writes "Very stable, easy to set up, and easy to use". IBM Spectrum Scale is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, Portworx Enterprise, DDN IME, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP and IBM Cloud Object Storage, whereas VMware vSAN is most compared with VxRail, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, HPE SimpliVity, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Dell PowerFlex. See our IBM Spectrum Scale vs. VMware vSAN report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors and best Cloud Software Defined Storage vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.