We performed a comparison between Dell ECS and Red Hat Ceph Storage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two File and Object Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's definitely good for unstructured data. In earlier days, we had Centera, so for the DR it's really good. It has load balancing facility, and we're using it with the Kemp Load Balancer."
"It is a stable platform."
"What I like best about Dell ECS is its stability. I also like that you can use it for large-scale data purposes. The solution works fine for me, and I haven't encountered any issues with it."
"It's my understanding that the initial setup is straightforward."
"I have found Dell ECS to be scalable."
"This solution is very easy to use, and is very reliable."
"It is 100% stable. It is also scalable."
"This product is very competitive."
"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."
"Most valuable features include replication and compression."
"Ceph’s ability to adapt to varying types of commodity hardware affords us substantial flexibility and future-proofing."
"The ability to provide block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster is very valuable for us."
"We have some legacy servers that can be associated with this structure. With Ceph, we can rearrange these machines and reuse our investment."
"We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"The setup is very complex."
"The solution needs to provide better integration between this solution and all other kinds of systems."
"Dell EMC ECS could improve by having Relational Database Services(RDS) to review progress. Additionally, if the training was provided it would be a benefit, it would be good for our engineers."
"The solution could be more cost-effective and secure."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"They could provide centralized reports."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"They do not have complete documentation, which is very weak and could be improved."
"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."
"An area for improvement would be that it's pretty difficult to manage synchronous replication over multiple regions."
"Some documentation is very hard to find."
"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"It needs a better UI for easier installation and management."
"In the deployment step, we need to create some config files to add Ceph functions in OpenStack modules (Nova, Cinder, Glance). It would be useful to have a tool that validates the format of the data in those files, before generating a deploy with failures."
"We have encountered slight integration issues."
Dell ECS is ranked 5th in File and Object Storage with 25 reviews while Red Hat Ceph Storage is ranked 3rd in File and Object Storage with 22 reviews. Dell ECS is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ceph Storage is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Dell ECS writes "Enables multiple protocol support, but its IOPS functionality needs improvement in terms of performance ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ceph Storage writes "Provides block storage and object storage from the same storage cluster". Dell ECS is most compared with Dell PowerScale (Isilon), Amazon AWS, NetApp StorageGRID, MinIO and Scality RING, whereas Red Hat Ceph Storage is most compared with MinIO, VMware vSAN, Portworx Enterprise, Pure Storage FlashBlade and Dell PowerScale (Isilon). See our Dell ECS vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage report.
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.