Huawei FusionStorage vs Red Hat Ceph Storage comparison

Huawei and Red Hat are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. Huawei is ranked #19 with an average rating of 7.5, while Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.9. Huawei holds a 0.7% mindshare in FaOS, compared to Red Hat’s 17.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Huawei users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 82% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Red Hat Ceph Storage and Huawei FusionStorage target scalable and reliable storage solutions. Red Hat Ceph Storage may provide better value for money due to its pricing model, while Huawei FusionStorage excels in performance and scalability.

Features: Red Hat Ceph Storage offers integration across object, block, and file storage, simplified management, and strong scalability for OpenStack environments. Huawei FusionStorage delivers high-performance data management, snapshot and cloning features, and comprehensive storage analytics capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Ceph Storage could enhance its user interface, further streamline deployment processes, and expand proprietary support services. Huawei FusionStorage might benefit from broader global community support, more flexible pricing structures, and deeper integrations with non-Huawei platforms.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Huawei FusionStorage provides streamlined deployment with robust support, ensuring high customer satisfaction. Red Hat Ceph Storage offers comprehensive documentation and community support, appealing to technically inclined organizations.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Ceph Storage is cost-effective with moderate initial costs and good ROI potential through its open-source model. Huawei FusionStorage, despite higher initial costs, aims for substantial long-term ROI through its high-capacity systems and advanced features.

To learn more, read our detailed Huawei FusionStorage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Huawei FusionStorage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 864,248 peers since 2012

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

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.8%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Huawei FusionStorage is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ceph Storage is 17.8%, down from 22.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

Eric Black

Solutions Architect at Recovery Point Systems

The ability to leverage multi-tenancy along with immutability is a huge benefit for us

The only thing I feel FlashBlade is missing is the SOS API. If it had SOS API, that would put it well over the top. Veeam Backup specifically has started to streamline their API, and they are doing that with SOS API. They have optimized it. Any of the S3 devices out there that support this SOS API can have far more API calls at once. On our side, that translates to better restoration. With SOS API, it can leverage far more restorations at a single given time or read from the device in simple terms. That results in maximizing the output and throughput from the device itself.

Read full review

Wondwossen Abebe Kebede

Program and performance manager at Ethio Telecom

Reliable platform that integrates well with different IT infrastructures and systems

The product integrates well with different IT infrastructures and systems in the telecom sector. Our partners manage services, including detailed integration and migration-related operations. The platform upholds the uptime and reliability of our business applications. We classify our systems into different tiers, ranging from machine-critical to business-critical, and FusionStorage helps us run all the services. It delivers a remarkable uptime of 99.9%. With our expectations for continuous service availability, we are operating 24/7. In cases where system interruptions occur, it enables rapid restoration, ensuring a prompt return to normal service levels. I rate it an eight out of ten.

Read full review

Rifat Rahman

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"FlashBlade offers low latency, high throughput, and seamless scalability."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is user-friendly. It's replication feature is great because it has active replication and active DR. That's the beauty of the product. It's a perfect solution for block storage."

"It has also helped to simplify storage for us in the way that it's easy to manage. Their automatic monitoring really helps when things break or are about to break. They see a problem coming and alert us even before our own system does."

"It uses the same platform for connectivity so integration is seamless."

"The most valuable features of this solution are the rewrite speed and the nonstop services."

"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."

"Among its most appealing features are its ease of handling and minimal maintenance requirements."

"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The product has a very simple GUI-based management platform and it is very simple to use. There is a very easy step-by-step configuration procedure that guides you through, and you can configure it very easily."

"Huawei FusionStorage does well in its basic functions and offers broad utility."

"It is a stable solution."

"In cases where system interruptions occur, it enables rapid restoration, ensuring a prompt return to normal service levels."

"The solution’s most valuable feature is its performance."

"Provides easy access to our data."

"High reliability with commodity hardware."

"Most of the features are beneficial and one does not stand out above the rest."

"Without any extra costs, I was able to provide a redundant environment."

"We are using Ceph internal inexpensive disk and data redundancy without spending extra money on external storage."

"I can compare Red Hat Ceph Storage with products from other vendors; I explored quite a few, but I still find that Red Hat Ceph Storage is making the most disruption."

"Ceph was chosen to maintain exact performance and capacity characteristics for customer cloud."

"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."

"It has helped to save money and scale the storage without limits."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups."

"I would like to see the licensing fees improved as well as the price per terabytes."

"It usually comes down to just what you hit and the value you're getting when you spend the money and license the products. I would always go, "If you want to make things better, lower your price and make your licensing simpler." There's always an opportunity around that."

"We initially encountered challenges with the assembly process due to issues with the documentation required during setup, an area where Pure Storage needs improvement."

"File storage needs a lot of improvement. Mainframe connectivity also needs improvement because it requires additional components to be integrated with Pure Storage FlashBlade. If you want to keep your backup data, then this becomes an even more expensive solution because Pure Storage FlashBlade will not be able to meet your backup needs."

"The solution is expensive."

"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"Their cloud services could be improved."

"The solution’s support could be improved."

"I hope for improvements in the product's processing ability and performance."

"The product needs improvement in terms of affordability."

"The initial setup and installation is not that straightforward. It should be made easier and the time to install should be reduced."

"The problem with Huawei is that it generally oversells. As a principle, Huawei does not educate the partner or the end user enough to scale up their solution correctly."

"Geo-replication needs improvement. It is a new feature, and not well supported yet."

"Routing around slow hardware."

"If you use for any other solution like other Kubernetes solutions, it's not very suitable."

"While the documentation for Ceph Storage is helpful, it could be improved."

"Please create a failback solution for OpenStack replication and maybe QoS to allow guaranteed IOPS."

"The product lacks RDMA support for inter-OSD communication."

"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."

"If troubleshooting is needed, the response should be faster."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is a hardware appliance, and it's very expensive if you compare its price with other solutions. You can get the same features and benefits from its competitor, VAST Data, but for half the price of Pure Storage FlashBlade."

"In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"I have seen ROI. It has allowed me to increase the density of my VMs without having to purchase anything additional."

"The product is very expensive."

"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."

"Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc."

"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"If one is a cheap solution and ten means it is a very expensive product, I would rate the price as two or three."

"It is expensive but might be optimal based on the partnership."

"We never used the paid support."

"The price of this product isn't high."

"The operational overhead is higher compared to Azure because we own the hardware."

"Most of time, you can get Ceph with the OpenStack solution in a subscription as a bundle."

"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."

"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."

"The price of Red Hat Ceph Storage is reasonable."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

864,248 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

14%

Retailer

12%

Government

University

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Pure Storage FlashBlade?

The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power out...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashBlade?

The pricing of Pure Storage FlashBlade is expensive compared to other products I used from other companies in the pas...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

I believe there is not much improvement needed because they have everything we need, but the interface is a little bi...

See all answers

What do you like most about Huawei FusionStorage?

In cases where system interruptions occur, it enables rapid restoration, ensuring a prompt return to normal service l...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Huawei FusionStorage?

The solution’s support could be improved.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Huawei FusionStorage?

Huawei FusionStorage provides a scalable, high-performance, and highly available distributed storage solution designe...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat Ceph Storage?

The high availability of the solution is important to us.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 19% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 11% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Dell ECS vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 5% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

Google Drive Enterprise vs Huawei FusionStorage

Compared 24% of the time

Google Cloud Storage vs Huawei FusionStorage

Compared 22% of the time

Dell ECS vs Huawei FusionStorage

Compared 12% of the time

Dropbox Business - Enterprise vs Huawei FusionStorage

Compared 10% of the time

More Huawei FusionStorage Competitors

MinIO vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 39% of the time

NetApp StorageGRID vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 6% of the time

VMware vSAN vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 5% of the time

Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 4% of the time

Dell PowerFlex vs Red Hat Ceph Storage

Compared 3% of the time

More Red Hat Ceph Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

July 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Storage

July 2025

Download Huawei FusionStorage product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

July 2025

Download Red Hat Ceph Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

Ceph

Overview

FlashBlade is the industry’s most advanced scale-out storage for unstructured data, powered by a modern, massively parallel architecture to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) and accelerate tomorrow’s discoveries and insights.

Pure Storage

Huawei FusionStorage fully distributed cloud storage features massive scale-out capability designed for cloud-based architectures. The on-board storage system software combines the local storage resources of standard x86 servers into fully distributed storage pools, providing block, object, or file storage resources to the upper layer. An enterprise can easily obtain the required flexibility and efficiency in data storage to keep up with the ever-changing dynamics of business.

Huawei

Red Hat Ceph Storage is an enterprise open source platform that provides unified software-defined storage on standard, economical servers and disks. With block, object, and file storage combined into one platform, Red Hat Ceph Storage efficiently and automatically manages all your data.

Red Hat

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL

China Merchants Bank, Liaoning, Zhejiang

Dell, DreamHost

Buyer's Guide

Huawei FusionStorage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

July 2025

Free Report: Huawei FusionStorage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about Huawei FusionStorage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

864,248 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Huawei FusionStorage 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.