We performed a comparison between DataCore SANsymphony and Red Hat Ceph Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined Storage (SDS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."DataCore's ability to seamlessly move virtual volume data between storage pools as well as their synchronous mirroring has made maintenance and disaster recovery planning achievable."
"The most useful feature of SANsymphony is that it's able to manage any brand of block storage."
"I am very happy with this product's ability to adapt, increase, and modify existing infrastructures."
"The most valuable feature for us is that we can adjust the size of the storage very easily, without stopping production."
"Our system is designed to be scalable and flexible, so it can grow and adapt to meet the changing needs of our clients."
"Storage is always available."
"Oracle OLTP benchmark to test how it improves the performance while using flash drive NVMe."
"An advantage of SANsymphony is its ease of use, especially when installing or upgrading the system."
"Ceph has simplified my storage integration. I no longer need two or three storage systems, as Ceph can support all my storage needs. I no longer need OpenStack Swift for REST object storage access, I no longer need NFS or GlusterFS for filesystem sharing, and most importantly, I no longer need LVM or DRBD for my virtual machines in OpenStack."
"We have not encountered any stability issues for the product."
"The configuration of the solution and the user interface are both quite good."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"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."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"I found it a little unnecessary to have to rename the configurations within the graphics console in order to have unique names."
"NVMeoF should be implemented. This protocol will play a major role in storage infrastructure in the future."
"When I sometimes reboot for maintenance, the connectivity from the iSCSI initiator host could be improved."
"One limitation of this solution is that it's Windows-based, e.g. one requirement to install DataCore SANsymphony SDS is putting it on a Windows server machine. It relies on Windows and that is a limitation because there are some customers who are looking for non Windows systems."
"There is no way of quickly matching the exact size of a vDisk to a disk pool."
"We are waiting for container support (on the roadmap), as well as a user-friendly full web-administration capability, and an improved API."
"It would be ideal if they were providing archive licensing with the ability to create a second pool on existing storage nodes."
"I think the performance reporting can be improved by adding historical statistics into a database for the purpose of comparing."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Ceph Storage is its user interface or GUI."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."
"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"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."
"It took me a long time to get the storage drivers for the communication with Kubernetes up and running. The documentation could improve it is lacking information. I'm not sure if this is a Ceph problem or if Ceph should address this, but it was something I ran into. Additionally, there is a performance issue I am having that I am looking into, but overall I am satisfied with the performance."
DataCore SANsymphony is ranked 4th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 54 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 22 reviews. DataCore SANsymphony is rated 9.2, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of DataCore SANsymphony writes "Robust with good replication and access protection ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". DataCore SANsymphony is most compared with VMware vSAN, HPE SimpliVity, StorMagic SvSAN, NetApp ONTAP and Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and NetApp StorageGRID. See our DataCore SANsymphony vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) 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.
