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 865,384 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

"The most valuable feature of this solution is performance."

"What I like best about Pure Storage FlashBlade is its object storage functionality, plus it has fast underlying hardware. Pure Storage FlashBlade is also very stable. I find its stability one of its valuable features."

"The most valuable features of FlashBlade include its replication capabilities, reports, and easy allocation. Everything is user-friendly."

"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."

"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."

"The most valuable feature is Safe Mode."

"The solution is able to handle workloads and is easy to use. It allows us to actually manage the boxes in less time."

"The most valuable features are the Metro clustering, and disaster recovery."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

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

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

"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."

"It is a stable solution."

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

"Provides easy access to our data."

"I really like that Red Hat Ceph Storage can be used as a total solution without any storage area network components."

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

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

"Stratus allows more reliability than all the other types of computers available."

"Most valuable features include replication and compression."

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

"The setup is very easy, deserving a ten out of ten."

"The solution is pretty stable."

More Red Hat Ceph Storage pros

Cons

"Recently, while upgrading the version code, one of the controllers failed. Replacing the controller took between 14 to 20 days."

"In the realm of micro-services, I think that Pure Storage can do well if they start getting in there and making their arrays more micro-services ready."

"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

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

"There is some room for new features related to authentication and integration with Kubernetes, and other solution using S3 Bucket."

"I would like to see better integration."

"Its configuration should be easier."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The product needs improvement in terms of affordability."

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

"Their cloud services could be improved."

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

"The solution’s support could be improved."

"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."

"This product uses a lot of CPU and network bandwidth. It needs some deduplication features and to use delta for rebalancing."

"I have encountered issues with stability when replication factor was not 3, which is the default and recommended value. Go below 3 and problems will arise."

"The management features are pretty good, but they still have room for improvement."

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

"I have not identified any drawbacks, however, the response to public platform inquiries could be faster."

"It takes some time to re-balance the storage in case of server failure."

"Rebalancing and recovery are a bit slow."

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

More Red Hat Ceph Storage cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I feel that the price could always be lowered."

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

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

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"The price of this solution could be made more affordable."

"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."

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

"The price is a little high."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

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

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

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

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

"We never used the paid support."

"There is no cost for software."

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

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

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

"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."

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

865,384 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

Retailer

14%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

University

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

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 10% 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 25% of the time

Google Cloud Storage vs Huawei FusionStorage

Compared 18% of the time

Dropbox Business - Enterprise vs Huawei FusionStorage

Compared 14% of the time

Dell ECS vs Huawei FusionStorage

Compared 9% 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

August 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Storage

August 2025

Download Huawei FusionStorage product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Ceph Storage

August 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

865,384 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.