We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and NetApp StorageGRID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about MinIO, Dell Technologies, Red Hat and others in File and Object Storage."The most beneficial feature of the product for data storage stems from the fact that it serves as a shared file storage."
"The solution is scalable."
"EFS is flexible."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."
"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 technical support is good."
"Right now, we have an older StorageGRID. I like that we can grow it."
"The most valuable feature is tiering."
"StorageGRID is designed for cloud-based, highly scalable storage. Think big names like service providers like Google who need massive storage volumes with scalability. It also offers cloud-enabled storage capabilities with cloud management functionality. So, if you prioritize scalability and cloud integration, StorageGRID is the way to go. Its object-based storage is built specifically for that purpose."
"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."
"Duplication, interface and the manageability is good and simple."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."
"The product's stability has some shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."
"Beyond the initial setup, this product is a little bit difficult to configure."
"The price is something that NetApp could improve, as with most companies. NetApp is known for not being the cheapest storage option, which is also valid for StorageGRID. There are other storage options on the market which we are aware of and have done proofs of concept for, but you cannot really compare the list prices because, as a big user of NetApp storages, we have totally different prices than some list prices. Still, the price information we got for other options are almost always less expensive than StorageGRID."
"We want to move towards Azure in the cloud. Right now, the system is all physical."
"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."
"There was a small amount of confusion when working with StorageGRID and Active Directory for access. We had to do things three to four times resulting in our engineer troubleshooting a couple of things. The location of the menu, along with what is inside the menu: configurations, settings, etc., is not straightforward to users. Most users are Windows-based. So, when make logical changes to the menu which are not similar to Windows, users and administrators get confused."
"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."
"The integration with more apps has room for improvement."
"I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is ranked 9th in File and Object Storage with 10 reviews while NetApp StorageGRID is ranked 7th in File and Object Storage with 12 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while NetApp StorageGRID is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "Offers integration capabilities that improve areas like storage and security". On the other hand, 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". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Amazon S3 Glacier and Azure NetApp Files, whereas NetApp StorageGRID is most compared with MinIO, Dell ECS, Red Hat Ceph Storage, Scality RING and Cloudian HyperStore.
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.
