We performed a comparison between Azure Data Lake Storage and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool's most valuable feature is security access policies."
"The response time and quality offered by the support team are good."
"I also like its speed. It's basically built on Azure Blob Storage, which was already fast. But Azure Data Lake Storage adds the hierarchical structure for even better performance."
"Azure Data Lake Storage is a user-friendly and easy-to-learn solution."
"It's a cloud-based tool within the Microsoft ecosystem, offering many benefits for data handling."
"We are definitely in the process of reducing our footprint on our secondary data center and all those snapshots technically reduce tape backup. That's from the protection perspective, but as far as files, it's much easier to use and manage and it's faster, too."
"NetApp's Cloud Manager automation capabilities are very good because it's REST-API-driven, so we can completely automate everything. It has a good overview if you want to just have a look into your environment as well."
"Replication to the cloud is the most valuable feature. Deduplication and compression are also very important to us. We are in the process of adopting to the cloud. We are going to AWS and we are trying to do a safety technician call out with integration to the cloud. NetApp allows us to move some of the volume to the cloud, at the same time that we continue providing the cloud services that we have on premises."
"Its scalability is very good."
"ONTAP has been very stable for us, specifically in the cloud environment. It allows us to have high availability as well as standalone systems if that's what we want within our specific workloads. Also, on-premise has been a very stable environment. We have very few outages and when we do, we work with support to get systems back online in a timely manner."
"The solution’s Snapshot copies and thin clones in terms of operational recovery are the best thing since sliced bread. Rollback is super easy. It's just simple, and it works. It's very efficient."
"ONTAP is great for helping you migrate on-premise workflows to cloud environments."
"The most valuable features are that it's reliable, simple, and performs well."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Pricing is always a factor. It could be more affordable."
"Some terminology is not easy to understand when using some interfaces."
"The solution needs to improve APIs and make them more accessible."
"From an SAP perspective, direct connectivity to SAP systems is an area that could be enhanced."
"When it comes to a critical or a read-write-intensive application, it doesn't provide the performance that some applications require, especially for SAP. The SAP HANA database has a write-latency of less than 2 milliseconds and the CVO solution does not fit there. It could be used for other databases, where the requirements are not so demanding, especially when it comes to write-latency."
"The automated deployment was a bit complex using the public APIs. When we had to deploy Cloud Volumes ONTAP on a regular basis using automation, It could be a bit of a challenge."
"They definitely need to stay more on top of security vulnerabilities. Our security team is constantly finding Java vulnerabilities and SQL vulnerabilities. Our security team always wants the latest security update, and it takes a while for NetApp to stay up to speed with that. That would be my biggest complaint."
"One difficulty is that it has no SAP HANA certification. The asset performance restrictions create challenges with the infrastructure underneath: The disks and stuff like that often have lower latencies than SAP HANA itself has to have."
"We are getting a warning alert about not being able to connect to Cloud Manager when we log into it. The support has provided links, but this particular issue is not fixed yet."
"We want to be able to add more than six disks in aggregate, but there is a limit of the number of disks in aggregate. In GCP, they provide less by limiting the sixth disk in aggregate. In Azure, the same solution provides 12 disks in an aggregate versus GCP where it is just half that amount. They should bump up the disk in aggregate requirement so we don't have to migrate the aggregate from one to another when the capacities are full."
"Some of the licensing is a little kludgy. We just created an HA environment in Azure and their licensing for SVMs per node is a little kludgy. They're working on it right now."
"We would like to have support for high availability in multi-regions."
Azure Data Lake Storage is ranked 15th in Cloud Storage with 5 reviews while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 1st in Cloud Storage with 60 reviews. Azure Data Lake Storage is rated 8.8, while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure Data Lake Storage writes "User-friendly and helps aggregate all information into one particular environment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Its data tiering helps keep storage costs under control". Azure Data Lake Storage is most compared with , whereas NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Amazon S3, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Google Cloud Storage and Portworx Enterprise. See our Azure Data Lake Storage vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP report.
See our list of best Cloud Storage vendors.
We monitor all Cloud 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.
