VMware vSAN Reviews

VMware vSAN utilizes different RAID features based on our requirements. Our default configuration uses RAID 5 for all VMs, though we implemented the mirror option for certain VM disks because VMware vSAN provides the capability to change disk RAID levels.

We assessed VMware vSAN's integration with vSphere as positive. We use vSphere vSAN separately and also use vSphere vSAN with VxRail, the Dell-provided VxRail, along with Dell automation capabilities. The performance is impressive, handling workloads better than direct-attached or legacy storage solutions.

We have not used VMware vSAN's data efficiency services extensively, as most of our work involves servers. Previously, our VMware Horizon environment also ran through VMware vSAN.

We currently use VMware vSAN's data encryption at the storage level. Regarding our data protection strategy enhancement, we previously used legacy storage to encrypt data. With VMware vSAN, we can enable encryption from both the VMware level and the VMDK level, which is very beneficial.

VMware vSAN offers different RAID features that meet our requirements. We use the default RAID 5 option for all VMs, but we implemented the mirror option for certain VM disks because VMware vSAN provides the capability to change disk RAID levels.

VMware vSAN's integration with vSphere has proven to be positive. We use vSphere vSAN separately and with VxRail, the Dell-provided VxRail, along with Dell automation capabilities. The performance is excellent, handling workloads better than direct-attached or legacy storage solutions.

We currently use VMware vSAN's data encryption at the storage level.

VMware vSAN can be improved in certain areas. In cases involving our large data stores with large VMs, we experience some latency, not during normal operation, but during database backup operations. We observed latency due to buffer issues from the top-of-the-rack switches. These issues are mostly network-related because all storage data traffic travels through the network.

I have recently used Nutanix, and I observed that Nutanix provides better performance than VMware vSAN due to its data locality features. VMware vSAN is now providing data locality, but we did not use that option.

If VMware vSAN provides additional features in the next release, such as the VM balancing feature called DRS on the cluster that VMware previously had, it would be beneficial. With DRS, VMs can move easily from one node to another within the same cluster. Nutanix does not provide that flexibility. When placing a VM on a cluster in Nutanix, the placement uses a balancing component. After that, the VM remains on the same host. If any contention occurs on the CPU or memory side, the VM stays in place until contention happens. If issues occur, the VM migrates to another host while transferring all objects to the same host. This is how their data locality is maintained. When a VM moves to any host, it moves with all VM objects. VMware vSAN does not currently offer this option. If a VM moves to another host, it accesses the disk object through the network, which increases latency. VMware vSAN now offers an option to select data locality, but it does not function like Nutanix. This is why some latency remains. If VMware vSAN can improve this feature, it would be very helpful and VMware would regain its top position.

Before VMware vSAN, I did not work with anything similar. We used legacy storage and legacy data stores for VMware.

I am involved in the implementation process and find it very easy. Everything is managed through the GUI, with everything accessible through the vSphere interface.

Regarding VMware vSAN pricing, I do not have much visibility because different teams handle the purchasing. I was never involved in the purchasing process, so I cannot comment on pricing.

Nutanix is a competitor to VMware vSAN.

I did not use VMware vSAN's automated provisioning extensively, so I cannot provide much insight on its impact regarding IT resource allocation and utilization.

I have worked with Nutanix on both local on-premises clusters and cloud clusters.

When comparing VMware vSAN to Nutanix, I am not specifically discussing Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure; I have worked with both cloud infrastructure and on-premises solutions.

From my experience, Nutanix has advantages over VMware vSAN, with data locality being the bigger advantage. Through data locality, Nutanix provides good bandwidth for VMs and VMDKs. When running Nutanix on ESXi or running Nutanix AHV, they utilize data with very minimal latency.

I would rate this product an 8 out of 10.

VMware vSAN's main use case today is better integration with VCF 9. The choice depends on what type of storage you have already used. If you have already used some vendor for storage, then you need to consider what should be done with your storage today. Otherwise, it is more integrated, and the price has been better. You need to set it up and do calculations because if you buy new things, then you buy new things with this type of disks. If you have an old system that you use, you need to think about it and calculate whether to go with VMware vSAN, depending on what you have. It may be easier to buy everything from Broadcom now.

The choice is about what you have today and how you are organized. If you are a big company, you may already have storage from a mainframe and other systems. Then you need to calculate and consider your storage options. If you are setting up a smaller branch office or need something secure, knowing this one group is responsible, then VMware vSAN is very good. For example, in China, we can centralize everything in racks because we may not have everything in racks there. Other storage options need to be considered as well, and it can be easy to transport. Overall, you should calculate, as it depends on the type of VMware vSAN you can use, and also think about the pricing.

VMware vSAN's key features that I have found most valuable are its improvements and ease of use. If you use all of the other products in VMware, everything is integrated, allowing for more automation and ease of use. You have everything packaged. The most important feature for me is that with VCF 9, everything is integrated. You have vROps, and you can analyze your data better and use automation because it is all integrated.

VMware vSAN integrates well with vSphere and all VMware services. You have access to all of the products with VCF 9. Integration is very important because it makes VMware vSAN more valuable. The problem for many is that you become dependent on Broadcom; you have no competitor then, and you are stuck with it. If you have another SAN, you can change the virtualization platform, but with VMware vSAN, you are committed to that platform. This can sometimes be a topic when discussing prices, but if you have it, you know you will have a straightforward system to work with. VMware vSAN's new version of VCF 9 is extremely good, with strong security features, including encryption options.

Based on my experience, VMware vSAN's main points for improvement could be its price. Discussing the pricing model is significant as Broadcom creates many discussions worldwide regarding pricing. While they have everything in the business landscape, I think improvements could be made in how VMware integrates with storage teams, particularly for large companies. Backup options with significant backup vendors could also be enhanced. Beyond that, I do not see many areas for additional functions that need to be addressed.

I have been working with VMware vSAN since the beginning. I do not remember when the first one came out, but initially, we were using the vSAN that VSA from HPE had, and then it became Broadcom's or VMware's product. It is a rather different product now and much, much better.

From my perspective, I would rate VMware vSAN's stability as extremely high, perhaps a nine. We occasionally encounter problems when migrating from the previous version to the new one. However, when setting up a new installation, it is relatively stable. We have had some issues, but overall, they have been resolved satisfactorily.

Positive

Regarding scalability, I think it is a six or seven. VMware vSAN's scalability discussion is more complex. If you have already bought it, you need specific servers, and it is easier with a SAN. When it comes to expanding, we have managed to change disks rather easily recently, although it requires more planning and is sometimes time-consuming compared to using a SAN.

Positive

If we consider technical support from Broadcom, I would rate them an eight or nine now. If you had asked me some time ago, I would have rated them lower, but after working with them recently, it is extremely good. This improvement is partly due to the changing support model where you need to be a partner to receive assistance, but currently, they are providing good support.

Positive

The main competitors for VMware vSAN in the market include other big SAN solutions such as HPE, Dell, and Pure Storage. If you have decided on a SAN option such as NetApp or something else, it depends on the type of solution you want. If you are working with VMware, you typically use SANs or VMware vSAN. Otherwise, you might choose another product. Nutanix with their Acropolis is somewhat similar but requires changing all vendors in your environment.

VMware vSAN's initial setup is simple and straightforward to expand and work with.

When we discuss data efficiency services in VMware vSAN's last version, I think it is extremely good. I have not run extensively with it yet, but we are looking into it because we believe it is beneficial for encryption and moving data. We also consider how to handle cold data and data classification, and it is extremely good in that regard.

Regarding supporting hybrid cloud environments, I think VMware vSAN is important. VMware vSAN's concept of a smart cloud involves placing it where you get the best return for your investment. For example, if you have developers using MSDN and free services in Azure, you have various products you might want to consider. VMware vSAN allows for transparency and could be used for DR solutions or testing. Hybrid cloud setups are good, and it is beneficial that you can analyze data classification, which is critical as some regulations, such as GDPR, restrict moving data to the cloud.

VMware vSAN's main benefits to users include better data security and the ability to classify data effectively. End-users may find it challenging to see the advantages because they often do not focus on what product is placed where. However, with separate classifications of data or VMs, users can be assured that classified data cannot be migrated out of a specific location. Ensuring data is secure is crucial for end-users who want to know that their data is protected from potential outside threats or attacks.

Overall, my final point for VMware vSAN would be rather good. I would rate it about a nine in five years' time. However, you need to keep in mind that while VMware vSAN is good, it is more a package of everything. You cannot just buy VMware vSAN; you need to invest in the full suite of VMware products. It is essential to recognize the comprehensive package you are purchasing within VMware's ecosystem. Currently, I believe VMware provides some of the best virtualization, security, storage, and operational solutions on the market. My overall review rating for VMware vSAN is a nine.

The primary use cases include all the virtualization use cases where you need to virtualize storage and servers.

It works for IT infrastructure and operates across almost all workloads. There is no specific use case that stands out from others. For complete IT infrastructure on-premise virtualization use cases, VMware vSAN works effectively.

The VMware vSAN feature that has had the greatest impact on operational efficiency is the basic software-defined storage functionality.

The integration with VMware vSphere has benefited IT infrastructure greatly, as its integration is out of the box, with no additional steps required during deployment.

As an infrastructure solution, once it is in place, almost all people in the organization consume it.

The scalability features of VMware vSAN have significantly supported business growth.

The only additional feature they can implement in the future to make it even better is to reduce the cost.

The interface, documentation, and compatibility are good, but they need to provide better support.

I have been working with VMware vSAN for almost seven to eight years.

I would rate its stability a nine out of ten, as it is very stable.

My experience with the technical support by VMware is acceptable but not great.

Sometimes the issue is that you don't get the best experience, whether it's the response time or first-level support quality.

Neutral

Before VMware vSAN, I worked with Nutanix.

I don't see any major advantage for VMware vSAN, as both products work effectively.

The initial setup was straightforward.

I have seen a return on investment; it's satisfactory in the long run, but the initial upfront investment shows that VMware vSAN is somewhat costlier.

The pricing of VMware vSAN is on the higher side.

Based on my experience, I would recommend VMware vSAN to others.

As a product, I rate VMware vSAN nine out of ten.

My name is Ajit Varghese and my email address is ajit.varghese@manai.com.qa

There are multiple locations where we have VMware vSAN. We have configured the cluster according to our needs: development, production, and QA environments. Our infrastructure runs on these particular clusters.

VMware vSAN is a good hyper-converged solution in the market right now where we can leverage VMware vSphere features. There are multiple features like HA, vMotion, and storage vMotion. The Distributed Switch is again a good feature to deliverables. Hot add features are available by default in vSphere, allowing us to immediately increase memory, CPU, and hard drive without any downtime.

While VMware vSAN is quite comprehensive, if we are running multiple infrastructures, applications, databases, and other elements, having a diagnostic tool to identify the actual problem area, whether application-side or infrastructure-side, would be beneficial. A proper monitoring tool that encompasses both applications and infrastructure would help in quickly resolving issues.

In my current company, we have been using VMware vSAN for almost five to six years. Previously, I worked in a partner-based company where customers were using VMware infrastructure.

In terms of stability, I give VMware vSAN nine points. It depends on the physical hardware and the infrastructure running on it, but we haven't encountered any issues.

VMware vSAN is scalable. It supports up to 64 nodes in a cluster, allowing us to add nodes and expand the cluster as needed. I rate its scalability as nine out of ten.

My experience with VMware's technical support has been good. While I haven't opened a case recently, my past experiences with them were excellent. I would rate their support nine points.

Positive

Cisco HyperFlex and VMware were previously used. We currently have a Nutanix setup in my company, and we are using it right now.

Setting up VMware vSAN is easy. We can configure a cluster within one to two hours, and it's not a big challenge for anyone with VMware vSphere-related knowledge.

Starting with a smaller infrastructure and scaling as required allows us to save costs initially. This has been beneficial for our return on investment.

The licensing was initially CPU-based, but it has changed to core-based. This has resulted in a slight cost increase.

I have used multiple solutions, including Cisco HyperFlex and Nutanix.

I would suggest customers use VMware vSAN because VMware offers a stable solution with good hypervisors and the best features compared to other solutions. Comparing it to Nutanix, I prefer VMware due to its stability and features. I would give VMware vSAN a rating of ten out of ten.

We use it as part of our office infrastructure. It helps in managing our end-user solutions.

Noise people with no specific specialization can manage the system. It's designed to be user-friendly. It offers role-based access and administration, which is much easier. It has built-in integration, ensuring a structured and resilient solution with high fault tolerance. Tasks are more efficient and publish updates quickly to address vulnerabilities.

It's easy to use. Users can add compute and storage nodes directly. It has role-based access, provides easy administration, and integration is built into the system. The updates can be performed without downtime, which is quite efficient.

vSAN has a significantly higher license cost post-merger. Its scalability is lower compared to solutions like Nutanix. The regeneration time after a hard disk failure is much longer than that of competitors. The pricing is not clearly published. It requires more clarity in terms of the cost associated with expanding the solution, adding nodes, and overall predictability of data storage capacity.

We have been using it for about six to seven years.

The scalability of vSAN is lesser compared to Nutanix. The maintenance and update process, in comparison, is easier with Dell VxRail scenarios.

Technical support is Zoom. PMS support is needed to address some issues.

We also have SimpliVity, which is easier to use. We chose vSAN but mentioned the challenges it has when compared to other solutions like Nutanix and SimpliVity.

Time-saving is a factor, accounting for around 50% of the efficiency.

vSAN has higher license costs. There is a lack of clarity regarding the pricing post-merger. Adding nodes won't disrupt the current solutions, but the branding and pricing still need clarity.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

Nutanix, SimpliVity, and Dell VxRail were evaluated alongside.

There should be more clarity on pricing and how vSAN integrates and performs against competitors in terms of scalability and efficiency.

We use the solution for our private cloud environment. We are hosting our internal applications.

Integration is one of the best things. The product’s ecosystem is better than Nutanix’s. It is one of the best things I have seen in VMware vSAN. The interface is easy to use. Compared to legacy systems, the tool is easy to implement. Replication and securing data is easier in vSAN. The main objective of vSAN is scalability. The product is highly available within our 3-node cluster.

The solution must provide better customization.

I have been using the solution for three years.

So far, the tool is stable. I rate the stability an eight out of ten. There were some bugs. The product has been better after version 8.0.

I rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten.

The support has been good so far.

We used an open-source platform from Proxmox before. Proxmox lacks features and integration compared to VMware vSAN. Proxmox has a community support model. It was not reliable for the production environment. The integration ecosystem and the support were the main reasons we switched to VMware vSAN.

The initial setup is very easy. I rate the ease of setup a ten out of ten. The tool is deployed on the cloud. It took me a day to deploy a 3-node cluster. We need a team to implement the product.

The product’s pricing is a bit higher than other solutions. The OpEx and subscription models are expensive. I rate the pricing a nine out of ten.

The solution does not have any impact on virtual machine performance. The performance is not related to the vSAN stack. However, it is mandatory to consider better hardware resources. The solution enables us to integrate the latest storage and hardware. We have not integrated the product with any third-party solutions. We are planning to integrate with Kubernetes. We plan to deploy the next model of the tool with DC and DR architecture to support our data protection and high availability needs. I will recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

I use the solution in my company for application servers where we don't have a block storage array. My company does not use the newer architecture since we prefer to use the older architecture or OSA.

The most valuable features of the solution stem from the storage policies that are set and the fact that it serves as a tool that you can retire if you want. The product offers a single disk group, making it possible for the computer and storage, which is a really good feature.

There are certain shortcomings in the stability of the product where improvements are required.

When the drive fails, I have heard that the degradation of disk groups happens. The rebuild time is not fast in VMware vSAN. I heard that vSAN ESA will provide better rebuild time. The previous version of VMware vSAN had some performance issues when the drive went down. With vSAN ESA, performance can be made faster. The performance offered by VMware vSAN OSA is not fast, making it in areas where improvements are required. If a drive fails in VMware vSAN OSA, the rebuild time is high.

I have been using VMware vSAN for three years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven and a half to eight out of ten.

I am not sure about the number of users who use the product since it is mostly used at an application level in our company. I believe that around 10 to 15 applications use VMware vSAN.

The product's deployment was managed by two people in my company.

The product's initial setup phase was very straightforward.

During the deployment process, the integration phase was an area that was internally managed by our bank, and it was challenging. From a hardware deployment perspective, the process was quick. Any product would take a week to be deployed in our company.

The solution can be deployed in a week. The configuration or integration with our components took a few more weeks. The go-to-market time is around a month to a month and a half.

From a cost perspective, it is expensive. From a usability perspective, it reduces the overhead costs attached to its users' servers.

Speaking about the product's data center storage efficiency, my company has experienced some reductions in its costs. When it comes to the support area, my company doesn't need many people to deal with VMware vSAN. The tool has reduced the use of a lot of resources for our company. From a data center footprint perspective, with the same server rack units, we are also able to cope with the storage part, leading to data center footprint reduction.

My company plans to use the product for our consolidation projects, where multiple arrays are present. If it was a single array with very limited SAN space, my company would try to move to VMware vSAN. Basically, the tool is used in our country and is not meant to be used at the global data center. Nowadays, my company has started to use products that can be used at the global data center.

I can't explain in detail how the tool's management features streamlined our company's IT tasks because I work at a very high level as a storage engineer in my company. I try to work with VMware vSAN wherever possible. From an implementation perspective, I don't know about the tool. I don't know how to explain why I like VMware vSphere's features. My company provides solutions, and the people who buy the products are provided and take care of them. I am not 100 percent aware of how VMware vSAN functions from a workflow or GUI perspective.

My company's requirements revolved around a few terabytes of storage, for which VMware vSAN was really helpful, especially in offering consolidated capacity from multiple storage arrays into one. From a scalability perspective, it is possible to add more nodes into the clusters to get the space you want. The disk gets rebalanced, and you get the space you want quickly. What my company looks at consists of all NVMe drives, so we get to use fast and high-density drives that offer more usable capacity.

For those who look at a small data center footprint, VMware vSAN can be useful in a very efficient manner since it can be described as a converged solution that offers vSphere and helps with networking and VMs. With VMware vSAN in place, users don't have to invest in hardware for storage. It can be described as a very easy and fast go-to-market time.

Considering my company's preferred engineering requirement, we started to use VMware vSAN.

I rate the tool an eight to nine out of ten.

Robosites, data center, and Hyper Converged solutions are examples of universal Hyper Converged solutions.

A one-stack solution from one vendor is the main benefit here. 

Additionally, improvements to the organization are not available at this time.

Maybe incorporation of automation to build clusters in a more automated way would be beneficial.

I have been using it for less than one year.

I have no experience with vSAN in production. So, I am not able to provide an answer. I would say it has good reliability.

At the moment, there are zero users. It is only a pilot and lab solution, so no users are onboarded.

I am not satisfied with VMware support, particularly with the reaction times, SLAs, and those kinds of issues.

vSAN and Nutanix convert in hyper-converged solutions.

The setup is straightforward.

The initial setup is managed internally only.

It operates in parallel with others. It is not a replacement.

My overall rating is eight out of ten.

I use the VMware vSAN in my company for its capabilities, such as HCI, redundancy, and stretched clusters.

The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using VMware vSAN for a couple of years. My company is a reseller and partner of VMware.

My company consists of consultants, so many of our customers use VMware vSAN.

The solution's technical support is good.

My company plans to switch to another solution from VMware vSAN. Many of the customers who use the product are unhappy with the current situation involving VMware vSAN and Broadcom.

The product's pricing model is not competitive anymore, specifically considering the situation involving VMware and Broadcom in the market. The product's price has been increasing lately. My company's customers started to switch from VMware vSAN to other products because of the increase in its prices. Compared to the products offered by its competitors, VMware vSAN is expensive.

I evaluated Red Hat Ceph Storage and VMware vSAN.

Against VMware vSAN, my company has started to consider other solutions in the market, like XCP-ng and other discounted products.

Speaking about whether my company evaluated any other product against VMware vSAN, I can say that many of our customers use Nutanix.

Though I am not sure, I believe that our company's customers use Nutanix since it has some advantages over VMware vSAN.

The tool's redundancy feature has greatly impacted our company's operational efficiency.

The integration capabilities of the product with the existing products in our company's IT infrastructure save a lot of time, especially when deploying a new server.

The scalability features of the product have supported my company's business growth in a very critical manner.

The product has been reliable. The performance level of the product has also been good.

The product is already advanced enough to meet our company's customers' use cases.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

I use the solution in my virtual environment for storage purposes.

The most valuable feature of the solution is vROps, along with the monitoring part.

There needs to be an increase in the supported memory and hard disk space, as it is an area where the product currently has certain shortcomings. Only 32 TB RAM is supported in vSAN Ready Node R740 and vSAN Ready Node R750.

I have five years of experience working with VMware vSAN.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

The scalability offered by the product is very simple. If you face any hardware issue, you can simply remove that part and purchase a new one, which may even include parts like the hard disk.

The scalability features offered by the product are highly used and are very popular nowadays. I rate the product's scalability a ten out of ten.

The solution's technical support was very good. The product has a lot of documentation on its website. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with HPE ProLiant Servers, which are installed through manual configurations.

The product's installation phase is easy.

The product's price is not high. The tool is available at a normal price.

VMware vSAN is better than its competitors.

The greatest impact of the tool on my operational efficiency stems from the fact that it serves as a software-based storage solution, specifically for Dell computers, and integrates well with VMware vCenter while offering availability and pre-configured DRS functionalities. VMware vSAN also integrates with vRealize Suite and VMware SRM for monitoring and DR.

I have manually integrated VMware vSphere with VMware vSAN. I have also manually integrated VMware vSAN with Dell and HPE servers. Dell has a pre-configured set of tools with VMware vSan, like vSAN Ready Node R740 and vSAN Ready Node R750.

The integration of VMware vSphere with VMware vSAN has benefited our company's IT infrastructure since it has made it faster than many other storage solutions. The performance offered is also very high.

The reliability offered by the product is very high since everything comes under one system. With the storage solution, you can easily set up a huge number of virtual desktops in your infrastructure.

I recommend the product to those who want a reliable storage system to store their data, specifically in the cloud.

There needs to be an increase in the capacity offered by the product, considering that thousands of products are used in the corporate sector.

It is easy to use the product. You can also use it online through its web interface.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.