We performed a comparison between NetApp StorageGRID and Red Hat Ceph Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Duplication, interface and the manageability is good and simple."
"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."
"Cost-effective and easy to deploy."
"The backup features are valuable. I've heard from our backup and data protection people that our clients are very satisfied with the performance in junction with the backup, which they archive on this type of object storage."
"The most valuable feature is tiering."
"The ability to get to the StorageGRID from anywhere on my network. The solution is remote. You don't have to be at a physical location."
"Right now, we have an older StorageGRID. I like that we can grow it."
"The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to restore data compared to our previous methods."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."
"We use the solution for cloud storage."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
"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 ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"I would like to see them integrate more with the monitoring platforms. It is a bit difficult to get automated monitoring of the system."
"Beyond the initial setup, this product is a little bit difficult to configure."
"The integration with more apps has room for improvement."
"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."
"The only real issue that we have run into is, when we are cloning, we cannot do a thin provision clone, it has to be a full clone."
"The redundancy and reliability are great, but I also see room for improvement there. I would like to see more efficiency in the storage and dedupe/compression solutions."
"The processes around installation and upgrade need improvement."
"One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes."
"I have encountered issues with stability when replication factor was not 3, which is the default and recommended value. Go below 3 and problems will arise."
"Some documentation is very hard to find."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"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."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
NetApp StorageGRID is ranked 7th in File and Object Storage with 12 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews. NetApp StorageGRID is rated 8.4, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of NetApp StorageGRID writes "Scalable object storage with robust data durability with efficient geo-distribution and comprehensive lifecycle management ensuring managing of large volumes of unstructured data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". NetApp StorageGRID is most compared with MinIO, Dell ECS, Scality RING, Cloudian HyperStore and Hitachi Content Platform, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Dell ECS. See our NetApp StorageGRID 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.
