We compared Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
User reviews indicate that Red Hat Ceph Storage is praised for its scalability, flexibility, and efficiency, with good customer service, while MinIO is valued for its scalability, high performance and user-friendly interface. Red Hat Ceph Storage is commended for reliability, compatibility, and cost-effectiveness, while MinIO is preferred for its simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and ease of use. Both products have positive ROI but may benefit from enhancements in different areas such as scalability, performance, and user interface.
Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage is praised for its scalability, flexibility, and ability to handle large data amounts, while MinIO is valued for its scalability, high performance, and user-friendly interface. Both products integrate seamlessly with existing systems.
Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage has been praised for its minimal and efficient setup costs, while MinIO is known for its easy and straightforward implementation. Users find Red Hat Ceph Storage reasonably priced and cost-effective, while MinIO offers flexible pricing options. Both products have fair and reasonable licensing structures., Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO both received positive returns on investment according to user feedback. Users expressed satisfaction with the cost-effectiveness and improved performance of Red Hat Ceph Storage. On the other hand, MinIO users highlighted the value and benefits they derived from using the product.
Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could improve in scalability, installation processes, documentation, GUI for management, performance, and troubleshooting capabilities. On the other hand, MinIO users suggest enhancements in performance, reliability, documentation, user interface, integration options, and feature set.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews for Red Hat Ceph Storage indicate varying time durations for deployment, setup, and implementation phases. In contrast, MinIO user reviews mention consistent timeframes for deployment and setup, with one user taking three months and another taking one week., Red Hat Ceph Storage is known for its knowledgeable and efficient customer service team, while MinIO has been praised for its exceptional assistance and dedication in providing prompt solutions. Both products prioritize customer satisfaction and smooth operations.
The summary above is based on 16 interviews we conducted recently with Red Hat Ceph Storage and MinIO users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Nice web interface, easy to use, with a low memory footprint."
"I like that if you have a problem, you can buy the home server. It is stable and robust."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of management and administration."
"The most valuable feature of MinIO is its ease of use, replication, and active directory. All the capabilities are in this solution."
"For starters, MinIO has a good user interface. You can access it through the browser and perform operations like creating the object."
"This is an all-in-one, user-friendly data storage."
"The tool’s integration is very easy. This feature has helped us reduce development time. The solution also has many out-of-the-box features like versioning support and management of roles and permissions. The product also supports clustered deployment."
"Good interface and a good approach to development and testing environments."
"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."
"Replicated and erasure coded pools have allowed for multiple copies to be kept, easy scale-out of additional nodes, and easy replacement of failed hard drives. The solution continues working even when there are errors."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"Data redundancy is a key feature, since it can survive failures (disks/servers). We didn’t lose our data or have a service interruption during server/disk failures."
"Ceph has simplified my storage integration. I no longer need two or three storage systems, as Ceph can support all my storage needs. I no longer need OpenStack Swift for REST object storage access, I no longer need NFS or GlusterFS for filesystem sharing, and most importantly, I no longer need LVM or DRBD for my virtual machines in OpenStack."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."
"Its reverse proxy features could be better."
"With problems, visibility is hard because everything is in containers. Difficult to get to the logs in order to figure out what the problem was."
"MinIO has behaved strangely in the past. For instance, the application dropped connection to MinIO. It's not too significant, but it loses connection. We're trying to understand exactly what is happening when this happens."
"The monitoring capability is really bad and needs to be improved."
"The MinIO dashboard is minimal as there are only a couple of features inside the dashboard for a basic user. I would like this to be more robust with more click-around features."
"MinIO could use a time patch on it. It could also use better documentation for some languages like Python."
"The developer support could be better."
"The tool’s pricing needs to improve. We also encountered challenges while deploying the tool in Kubernetes. The documentation also was not too great. We have currently deployed the solution in a stand-alone fashion."
"I would like to see better performance and stability when Ceph is in recovery."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"Ceph is not a mature product at this time. Guides are misleading and incomplete. You will meet all kind of bugs and errors trying to install the system for the first time. It requires very experienced personnel to support and keep the system in working condition, and install all necessary packets."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
MinIO is ranked 1st in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews. MinIO is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of MinIO writes " A tool for storage purposes that helps businesses save time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". MinIO is most compared with NetApp StorageGRID, Dell ECS, Pure Storage FlashBlade, Cloudian HyperStore and SwiftStack, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade, NetApp StorageGRID and Dell ECS. See our MinIO vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.
See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.
We monitor all File and Object Storage 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.
