IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

All-Flash Storage Arrays Pool Reviews

Showing reviews of the top ranking products in All-Flash Storage Arrays, containing the term Pool
NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS) logo NetApp AFF (All Flash FAS): Pool
Bob Mulders - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Infrastructure, Network & Security Management at Vos Logistics N.V.

We are currently using NetApp and intend to change the storage next year. Our choices are between NetApp and Pure. We are a transport company, so part of the decision will be based on the price.

All storage vendors have good solutions now.

We are not using NetApp AFF, we are using NetApp with the disks and a bit of Flash.

We have a flash pool with our NetApp and we want to go to full Flash next year.

I would rate NetApp AFF an eight out of ten.

View full review »
MD
AWS Solutions Architect at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees

As for the initial setup, we were on FAS initially, and the migration was not smooth because the 7-MTT tool was not that mature. After the initial hiccups, however, the experience has been okay, and we are pleased with this product.

Building a cluster was not complicated, but ONTAP was not stable. I remember one upgrade that lasted for more than 24 hours. It took the same amount of time with FabricPool, and FlexCache still has loopholes. It is not efficient. There is still quite a lot of room for NetApp to strengthen its ONTAP core.

We were migrating data from 7mode to Cdot, and it was a new build. Also, ONTAP testing was new, so we didn't have many benchmarks to work through. The migration and ONTAP testing were not smooth. We had quite a number of problems, and we were forced to do a lot of upgrades. The issues related to compatibility had to be escalated to the highest level of the NetApp engineering team and the product build team as well. We worked closely with them.

As for deployment, we had some issues with switching at the cluster backbone when building a cluster. Other than that, it took us less than a month or so because we had professional services as well. We were able to build the solution in 90 days.

View full review »
HM
Senior Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We are not using the NetApp cloud backup services. Instead, we have a storage solution on the back end and AFF on the front end. In this setup, we have high I/O with a low storage expenditure.

Our company is mainly concerned with software development and we have VMs as part of our infrastructure. We have a large number of VMs and they require a large data capacity, although we don't know which ones require high-intensity input and output. The reason for this is that some scenarios demand a high level of I/O, whereas, with others, the demand is low. We have AFFs set up at the front end, and at the backend, we have ECD boxes, which are the storage grid.

We treat the system as a fabric pool setup. When a high level of I/O is required, the data will be stored on NetApp AFF at the front end. We created a policy so that pooled data will move automatically to the lower-end capacity units, which are configured from the storage unit.

NetApp helps to accelerate some of the demanding enterprise applications that we have, in particular, our database applications. 

NetApp AFF has helped to simplify our infrastructure while still getting a very high performance. Prior to setting up AFFs, we had latency issues. Now, things are more balanced, including the volumes that are on SAS or SATA.

Using NetApp AFF has helped to reduce support issues, including performance-tuning. About a year and a half ago, we were experiencing some performance issues. Lately, this has not been the case, although occasionally, we still have problems. We are exploring whether it is the server hardware or an issue with VMware and drivers.

The ONTAP operating system has made things somewhat simpler, although we don't use it very much. I normally work on the CLI so for me, it is not a big difference. That said, as features are released with the latest versions, I review them to stay updated.

We also use NetApp's StorageGRID and the combination of it with AFF has reduced our overall cost while increasing performance. We see benefits on both sides. 

View full review »
Swann Adjemian - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of the Projects Department at ALPIX

The most valuable features are 

  • performance
  • storage efficiency, due to the compression and deduplication.

We use StorageGrid in two ways. The first usage is stand-alone to provide S3 object storage. And the second use case is to use FabricPool, the NetApp technology that moves a snapshot from the AFF to AWS. It's a very good solution because AFF is SSD technology, meaning the storage is expensive. It's very helpful to have the ability to move cold data, like a snapshot, out of the SSD.

View full review »
Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series logo Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series: Pool
GV
Engineer at Secretaria de Educacion del Gobierno del Estado de Mexico

I have worked with this equipment for the last two years. When I worked before in Hitachi Data Systems, I worked for a data architect and designed complete solutions, so I have a lot of interaction with the clients.  I handle the solutions, the capacity of the disk, configuration, initial set up, definitions of the DP pools, assigning the volumes, creating the entire SAN, etc. Also, I manage the SAN switches. I worked for Pearson, Sonic, Mobiistar, Macromer, Mynorte, and Santander. Every time, I created the whole environment— all open and the mainframe in development. For example, at Ponavid, I created the whole solution, assigned the space, performed all the troubleshooting, as well as supported all the hardware and the performance.

View full review »
IBM FlashSystem logo IBM FlashSystem: Pool
Ghulam Mustafa - PeerSpot reviewer
BT Area Champion/Trainer at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees

When we procure enterprise storage solutions, the license is always be bundled with the deal. There are different licenses for encryption, replication, deduplication, data reduction pools, et cetera, and all should be included in one bundle when we buy a new solution. It's part of that deal.

View full review »
Albert Hernaus - PeerSpot reviewer
Storage Consultant at E-Storage

The Data Reduction Pools (DRP) support could be better.

View full review »
KashifAdeel - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Specialist at InfoTech Group

IBM FlashSystem is scalable as per our organization's requirements. We have also upgraded the capacity after two years and it is working fine and it was quite easy to add more capacity to the existing pool. We can use the same capacity to increase the existing two drives or for the new workload.

I work for medium to large enterprises which use this solution.

View full review »
DP
System Administrator at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

The data reduction pool feature sucks and is not recommended for use with heavy workloads. I also understand that the APIs don't work well and need improvement. In the next release, I would like to see a better monitoring system for metrics.

View full review »
MD
Storage Administrator at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

A big area for improvement is that the data reduction pool feature is not recommended for use in a production environment because it has stability and performance issues. There are also some issues with updates when you have different versions installed, which makes it quite difficult for the administrator to choose which version to install.

View full review »
Huawei OceanStor Dorado logo Huawei OceanStor Dorado: Pool
AA
Regional Sales Manager at New horizon

In our implementation there are complications. I am not a technician but I have heard it requires eight hard drives to set up. For example, if customers are looking for NAS and SAN and want to have a small cluster of hard disk drives to enable both of these features. You can't do it because you need eight hard disk drives for a separate pool. For NAS, you will again need eight hard disk drives. You will need a total of 16 hard drives to make it a NAS and SAN storage system functional.

View full review »