No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

FileMage vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Everpure FlashArray
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
232
Ranking in other categories
All-Flash Storage (2nd)
FileMage
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
File and Object Storage (22nd)
Red Hat Ceph Storage
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined Storage (SDS) (3rd), File and Object Storage (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

Sowjanya MV - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at Wipro Limited
Has improved performance for mission-critical workloads and enabled seamless non-disruptive upgrades
The availability is 99.99%, which is the main factor any customer would need because their data should be available whenever they want to access it. This is one main critical thing. It is very easy to upgrade since Pure Storage FlashArray handles it well. Everything is non-disruptive now; previously, there were forklift shifts, but now that is not the case. Pure Storage FlashArray says no to forklift upgrades. Usually hardware requires downtime, but Pure Storage FlashArray has improved their footprint so that they are not asking for downtime; everything is just a non-disruptive activity, which is why customers are more inclined towards Pure Storage FlashArray. Customers want more of the models in their environment due to the performance they are giving, and everything is in one Pure1 Array console where we can view all the models on one page or just an orchestration tool. You don't miss anything; you have replication, notifications about replication, and details about which host groups replication is happening in and if that replication is successful or failed. On a daily basis, our purpose is to create volumes for infrastructure; our daily activities include creating volumes and mapping them to the host, doing any migrations from a VM, clearing the data stores, and carving the volumes to those VMs. One key factor is the data compression with a ratio of 5:1, focusing on space efficiency, inline deduplication, and the compression Pure Storage FlashArray works on; that is a major factor we can suggest to any customer. Analytical capabilities are crucial. Daily, we check the throughput and consumption, and Pure Storage FlashArray provides predictions for one year regarding usage. This prediction helps plan updates well ahead. For support, we just raise a case, and they follow up and get it done. There is also AI readiness, but with the model R2, we don't have much of that AI readiness. For others, we do have AI readiness that predicts capacity based on daily or monthly trends, enabling us to analyze how much space we need or if we need to expand the disk shelf. From an operational point of view, a good feature is that if you accidentally delete a volume, it will be retained in the destroyed state for the next twenty-four hours, which is not the same with any other vendor. I have worked in this storage domain for the past fifteen years, and this option is remarkable, benefiting any L1 or L2 engineer. Additionally, from a compliance perspective, Pure Storage FlashArray has REST APIs enabled. I have not explored automation much, but from a security standpoint, it is strong with encryption data. If you want to automate, you can easily integrate with all clouds and explore Pure Cloud for scheduling workloads, including volume creation. Customers find benefit in Pure Storage FlashArray's single management pane of glass due to the dual controller and active-active setup. If one of the controllers goes down, all workloads automatically shift to the other controller, ensuring their data is safe and accessible at all times. This is a highlighted feature that any customer desires because their data should always be accessible. For SAN workloads, we use Pure Storage FlashArray because for SAN FC fiber channel, we don't use it; we use NetApp for NAS activities. We have clearly split this, so SAN is for mission-critical applications, while network-attached storage handles file systems. This architecture helps us maximize the benefit from Pure Storage FlashArray due to the significant workloads from this giant retail client. From a footprint and energy consumption perspective, you can see energy consumption from the Pure1 storage portal on a daily basis, and it is very compact. The three models we use consume only three units, which is quite low. From a footprint and data center perspective, it doesn't occupy much space. As everything moves to cloud, there are requirements to avoid excess spending on data centers, and Pure Storage FlashArray is efficient in energy consumption and is environmentally friendly.
HarshShah2 - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer at Veefin Solutions Ltd.
Modern file gateway has transformed secure cloud transfers and now simplifies partner onboarding
I would like to see an enhanced web-based file manager for non-technical end-users, allowing them to easily preview or move files via GUI. I would also appreciate more native webhook destinations for event-driven automation and deeper out-of-the-box integration with identity providers like Okta for admin single sign-on. The platform is very stable and lightweight in my experience, and most improvements would be minor quality-of-life updates for administration and advanced user management in larger corporate setups. I give it a nine out of ten because I do not think it deserves a ten as it lags in some spaces, especially where large organizations are concerned. FileMage is self-hosted, not serverless, and manual high availability setup is difficult. The basic end-user web interface is a limitation. There is a lack of native complex workflow automation, so I think nine is appropriate.
Rifat Rahman - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Architect & CEO at Tirzok Private Limited
Offers reliable performance and availability for large deployments
I would like to see improvements in Red Hat Ceph Storage not because I necessarily think it needs improvement, but because I generally prefer to do things manually rather than following the containerization part. Current deployments are based on containers, but I deploy manually with my scripts and controls. If there are no Kubernetes-like requirements, I often prefer to deploy a whole manual process. I don't ask for improvements in the deployment model because Red Hat has its own philosophy about making things, but it's my personal choice that I prefer things manually. Some features are available only in the containerization part, so if those are also available in manual deployment, that will help.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"One could tell, the minute we switched to this program, everything ran a lot faster."
"It helps to simplify storage. For most of our customers, when they move to Pure Storage, storage becomes an afterthought."
"It comes with a large number of features out-of-the-box, which makes it easy for us to see problems and manage capacity."
"Pure Storage is seen as a visionary company with leading edge technology."
"The sales and executive support have been outstanding compared to the rest of the market... My upgrade paths have been simple on the Pure... It's a lot simpler to implement and a lot simpler to manage."
"The security operating system is its most valuable feature because it's very simple, easy to use, and operate. You don't have to do very serious training to operate this equipment. It's user-friendly and pretty straightforward."
"It is always out of the box, and ready to use."
"Once it's set up, it just runs on its own and only requires the occasional checkup."
"FileMage works very well with GCP cloud storage right out of the box and it is very easy to install, easy to use, and has a very user-friendly interface."
"FileMage has positively impacted our organization by drastically modernizing our file transfer infrastructure, providing security gains associated with legacy SFTP setups, and significantly reducing vendor onboarding time."
"FileMage has positively impacted my organization by drastically modernizing our file transfer infrastructure, eliminating storage maintenance overhead, closing security gaps associated with legacy FTP setups, and significantly reducing vendor onboarding time."
"What I found most valuable from Red Hat Ceph Storage is integration because if you are talking about a solution that consists purely of Red Hat products, this is where integration benefits come in. In particular, Red Hat Ceph Storage becomes a single solution for managing the entire environment in terms of the container or the infrastructure, or the worker nodes because it all comes from a single plug."
"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."
"The high availability of the solution is important to us."
"High reliability with commodity hardware There is no cost for software"
"The most valuable feature is the stability of the product."
"I would definitely recommend Red Hat Ceph Storage. It is a complete solution for cloud-native storage needs."
"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."
"radosgw and librados provide a simple integration with clone, snapshots, and other functions that aid in data integrity."
 

Cons

"I would like to see a Nagios monitoring plugin which watches the health and performance of the system. The only one available just checks volume capacity."
"Once, before Pure went public, we were a member of their customer advisory board and beta tested replication. One requested enhancement yet to manifest is the scheduling of snapshot replications."
"It is not possible to create a cluster on top of multiple arrays."
"The interface lacks the same level of control as some other arrays I've used."
"In terms of the future, I have been excited by some of the copy data management stuff that they're talking about building into the environment. There are feature sets where I've done a lot of automation work. So, I am always looking forward to extensions of their API. They're also talking about a phone home centralized analytics database being used as a centralized management console with a list of new cloud features, but this doesn't seem finalized."
"We've had it in place for about a year and a half and have had zero complaints, other than that box-to-box replication is not encrypted."
"We have not seen a reduction in our TCO nor have we seen ROI."
"It's not so scalable. It's got moderate scaling capabilities right now. The clustering technology needs a bit of work, they need to improve that."
"I give it a nine out of ten because I do not think it deserves a ten as it lags in some spaces, especially where large organizations are concerned."
"FileMage can be improved in the area of cloud deployment, which left the permissions wide open, and the Quick Start Terraform does as well."
"To improve FileMage, I would appreciate seeing an enhanced web-based file manager for non-technical users and more native webhook destinations for event-driven automation."
"The storage capacity of the solution can be improved."
"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."
"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."
"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."
"Routing around slow hardware."
"Ceph is not a mature product at this time. Guides are misleading and incomplete."
"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."
"It would be nice to have a notification feature whenever an important action is completed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We feel that the pricing is fair and the licensing process was easy for both."
"The pricing is very attractive and it delivers performance for the money."
"Our Evergreen Storage subscription is supposed to be good when we go to upgrade."
"We have a seen a reduction in TCO. It is definitely a cost-effective solution for us. We have seen ROI."
"I would rate the pricing of Pure Storage FlashArray a five out of ten. It is expensive but not too much."
"Pure Storage has not helped us to reduce our licensing costs."
"No storage device is cheap, but Pure Storage is fairly priced and offers what you pay for. You get all the licenses in the future when you purchase a license."
"The solution is expensive."
Information not available
"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription​​ as a bundle.​"
"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."
"We never used the paid support."
"If you can afford a product like Red Hat Ceph Storage then go for it. If you cannot, then you need to test Ceph and get your hands dirty."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"There is no cost for software."
"The other big advantage is that Ceph is free software. Compared to traditional SAN based storage, it is very economical."
"The price of this product isn't high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
49%
Comms Service Provider
15%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Transportation Company
6%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business71
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise159
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

Which should I choose: HPE 3PAR StoreServ or Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform F Series?
Both are great platforms, but if you are considering all flash solutions, I would recommend you to consider Pure Stor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashArray?
I have knowledge about the licensing part, which we obtained for around 10 years from the time of deployment, but I d...
What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashArray?
When it comes to Everpure FlashArray ports shown in the GUI, it would be better if, when one of the Pure array ports ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FileMage?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has shown that the setup process was incredibly fast. I was up ...
What needs improvement with FileMage?
I would like to see an enhanced web-based file manager for non-technical end-users, allowing them to easily preview o...
What is your primary use case for FileMage?
My primary use case for FileMage is deploying a secure cloud-native SFTP and FTP gateway backed directly by AWS S3 to...
How does Red Hat Ceph Storage compare with MiniO?
Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This ...
What needs improvement with Red Hat Ceph Storage?
Areas of Red Hat Ceph Storage that have room for improvement include more promotion. Many people do not know about th...
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Ceph Storage?
I do not have experience working with solutions such as Red Hat Ceph Storage and StorPool. I have plenty of experienc...
 

Also Known As

Pure Storage FlashArray
No data available
Ceph
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nielsen, Lamar Advertising, LinkedIn, Betfair, UT-Dallas
Information Not Available
Dell, DreamHost
Find out what your peers are saying about FileMage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.