We performed a comparison between IBM Spectrum Scale and IBM Spectrum Virtualize 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."It is a scalable solution."
"The profile share is a valuable feature."
"Technical support has been very helpful. They provide us with pretty good solutions that we can implement moving forward."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share files across different platforms."
"We can have multiple systems within the same file system."
"Allows us to share files across multiple environments."
"The high performance of the solution is its most valuable aspect. If you compare it to other storage solutions, it's much better."
"It makes our file system sharing a lot easier, even across different continents. We have had file systems shared across different continents with no performance degradation."
"Using SBC, a valuable feature is the mirroring, which is the virtualization of the disk between disparate places."
"It lowers cost. It does so by getting more efficient use out of the technology behind it."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity of use, the flexibility, and the options included. I mean, it's just a big time saver."
"The abstraction flair and the abstraction layer. We had a mixture of different storage arrays, and the wonderful thing about SVC is is that it normalizes all it into a single driver. A single view that all hosts see simultaneously."
"One of the main features of Spectrum Virtualize is it virtualizes the servers from the storage. We have a very large infrastructure. A major advantage is when you get the aged storage arrays and you have to replace all of those."
"I like all the features, but the most impressive recently has been the introduction of IBM's Flash Core Modules. They are a form of a flash drive, but they have many more features."
"We can failover easily, because a lot of our data is replicated from family to the second replication."
"It's got full features, so we can compress volumes. We can do thin volumes and we can change them on the fly."
"The pricing and licensing model for this solution are complex and it is sometimes difficult to explain it to customers."
"We do have some issues where Spectrum Scale does not work as expected. We have seen our Spectrum Scale servers go down unexpectedly, but because we have a cluster, it does not take out the entire organization."
"This is probably the biggest challenge, getting everything upgraded, because it just takes time. We wish it was a faster solution to be able to do everything at once, but you have do each node individually. The more nodes, the longer it takes."
"It would be helpful if there was a graphical user interface that could walk you through the deployment process. The instructions surrounding setup aren't the best. They need to be more step-by-step."
"I believe there is no graphic user interface, so they should include it."
"Making it a little easier to add bad file sets would help. There is a transition to how you add storage and how you add a file set, so making that a little smoother would probably be my recommendation."
"They should probably simply the Red Hat implementation portion. This portion was not as straightforward as I would like it to be."
"Integration with other vendors is not available."
"I already discussed possible improvements with some of the guys from Hearnsley. One of our frustrations is when you go to expand volumes in a global mirror environment, you have to stop everything in order to expand. So that's one of the things."
"The disk reliability is not that good."
"The integration would be an option that we would like, but I understand that's not how it's going to be implemented."
"In general, the migration is complicated. Though, it is case-by-case."
"They are actually working on one bug we found, which was with flash restore. This was the user interface design for virtual environments."
"There are big arrays now, and if a customer wants add more disks to it, you have to have another array. Adding disks to existing arrays is one of the most demanded things from our customers."
"NBME support and support for a higher Fibre Channel lengths could be improved, but those are already on the roadmap."
"Tighter integration with cloud storage might be useful as a target for a variety of use cases."
IBM Spectrum Scale is ranked 7th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 10 reviews while IBM Spectrum Virtualize is ranked 15th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 36 reviews. IBM Spectrum Scale is rated 8.4, while IBM Spectrum Virtualize is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Scale writes "A stable solution with valuable profile-sharing features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Virtualize writes "A highly scalable product that is relatively easy to use and set up". IBM Spectrum Scale is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, Portworx Enterprise, VMware vSAN, DDN IME and Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), whereas IBM Spectrum Virtualize is most compared with Dell VPLEX, VMware vSAN, VxRail, DataCore SANsymphony and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP. See our IBM Spectrum Scale vs. IBM Spectrum Virtualize report.
See our list of best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors, best Software Defined Storage (SDS) vendors, and best Cloud Software Defined Storage 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.
