We performed a comparison between Qumulo 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."The feature that I like most is the analytics part of the file system."
"The most valuable features of Qumulo are its rolling updates and all-day availability."
"The data protection algorithm to protect the data between the nodes has been the most valuable feature. The integration with backup platforms such as Veeam and Veritas has also been valuable."
"It is a very stable product. I never faced any issues."
"The most valuable feature is real-time analytics."
"The ratio of total operational cost to complexity versus feature set is very good."
"The most valuable features of Qumulo are the ease of management and special permissions that are quick to enable. The overall performance of the solution is good."
"The most valuable feature of Qumulo is the ability to share files and reliability."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"The community support is very good."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"It's a very performance-intensive, brilliant storage system, and I always recommend it to customers based on its benefits, performance, and scalability."
"We use the solution for cloud storage."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"Qumulo should continue to expand automation and orchestration capabilities."
"Some anti-theft permissions do not transfer well to Qumulo."
"The support for iMac and protocols should be improved, not all features are available."
"In the next release, I would like to see the ability to have more control at a terminal level of the file system."
"The price of the software is a bit expensive, so a reduction in cost would make it more competitive."
"One aspect of Qumulo that I hoped to see improved was its software upgrade process, which did see significant progress during my usage. Initially, upgrading the software resulted in several minutes of system downtime. However, by the time I departed last summer, the downtime had reduced to mere ten seconds. Although I am unsure if Qumulo has yet achieved a completely outage-free upgrade, I simply performed the upgrades early in the morning before the marketing department began its workday, so any downtime was inconsequential."
"In the future, I would like to see non-disruptive updates."
"The solution could improve availability and improve data protection or data services such as compression of deduplication. In a future release, we'd like to have more cloud API integrations."
"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."
"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."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
Qumulo is ranked 8th in File and Object Storage with 8 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews. Qumulo is rated 7.8, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Qumulo writes "Useful data sharing, simple cluster scaling, and excellent support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". Qumulo is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), VAST Data, Nasuni, Scality RING and Cloudian HyperStore, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and NetApp StorageGRID. See our Qumulo 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.
